MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200248641 · doi:10.1007/s40273-021-01115-5

Systematic Literature Review to Identify Utility Values in Patients with Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) and Their Caregivers

2021· review· en· W4200248641 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
C. Simone Sutherland, Pollyanna Hudson, Stephen Mitchell, Noman Paracha

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacoEconomics · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurogenetic and Muscular Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersF. Hoffmann-La Roche
KeywordsSpinal muscular atrophySMA*Health economicsQuality of Life ResearchMedicinePublic healthPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyGerontologyPathologyDiseaseComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a progressive neuromuscular disorder that has a substantial impact on health-related quality of life for patients with SMA and their caregivers. Utility values ('utilities') are used in health economic analyses to incorporate individual or societal perspectives regarding the desirability of health outcomes such as a certain health state or change in health states over time. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this systematic literature review (SLR) was to identify published utilities associated with patients with SMA and their caregivers and to determine the extent to which Health Technology Assessment (HTA) requirements of methods used to generate utilities are met. A secondary objective was to broaden the scope to identify utilities associated with other (non-SMA) neuromuscular disorders. METHODS: A comprehensive search to capture published utilities associated with patients with SMA and their caregivers was performed in 2019 and updated in 2021 using several electronic databases in addition to supplementary sources. As we anticipated that few published utilities associated with SMA would be identified, the search also captured utilities for other (non-SMA) neuromuscular disorders that may serve as useful surrogate values for studies of SMA and other rare diseases. Electronic searches were performed in Embase, MEDLINE, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews, and EconLit via the Ovid platform and were supplemented by searches of the grey literature (reference lists, conference proceedings, global HTA body websites, and other relevant sources). Study eligibility criteria were based on the population, interventions, comparators, and outcomes (PICO) framework. The quality of the full-text publications was assessed using a checklist based on UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence technical support documents. RESULTS: In total, 14 publications that reported SMA-related patient or caregiver utilities or disutilities met the eligibility criteria to be included in the SLR; the included studies demonstrate the substantial health-related quality-of-life burden of SMA on both patients with SMA and their caregivers. A variety of preference-based measures were used to derive utilities for patients with SMA and their caregivers. Different methods for collecting utility data included patient and proxy assessment of health states using questionnaires, vignette methodologies, structured forms of expert elicitation, and mapped data from results of clinical trials. A range of utilities was reported from both patient- and proxy-reported data, which reflects the degree of disability associated with early- and later-onset SMA. Methods for deriving utilities were assessed with respect to three reference cases from HTA bodies in the UK, the USA, and Canada. None of the 14 publications met the requirements of all three HTA bodies because of differing tariff requirements between countries; one study met the requirements of HTA bodies in Canada and the UK. Also, six studies did not report the method of valuation, which precluded analysis with respect to the HTA reference cases. CONCLUSIONS: This SLR provides a comprehensive repository of the currently available utilities relevant to patients with SMA and their caregivers. This SLR provides recommendations for establishing consensus on the approach to generating utility values for the SMA patient population and their caregivers for health economic decisions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacoEconomicsSame topicNeurogenetic and Muscular Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207