Analysis of the Current Status and Characteristics of Health Economics Reporting in Clinical Practice Guidelines for 2021–2023

Xin Xing; Guohua Zhang; Weize Kong; Liping Guo; Xiuxia Li; Zhipeng Wei; Yongbin Lu; Howard White; Yaolong Chen; Kehu Yang

doi:10.1111/jebm.70062

Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine ›› 2025, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (3) : e70062 DOI: 10.1111/jebm.70062

ARTICLE

Analysis of the Current Status and Characteristics of Health Economics Reporting in Clinical Practice Guidelines for 2021–2023

Xin Xing ¹^,²^,³^,⁴
, Guohua Zhang ⁵
, Weize Kong ¹^,²^,³
, Liping Guo ¹^,²^,³
, Xiuxia Li ¹^,²^,³^,⁶^,⁷
, Zhipeng Wei ¹^,²^,³
, Yongbin Lu ¹^,²^,³^,⁶^,⁷
, Howard White ¹^,²
, Yaolong Chen ¹^,²^,³^,⁶^,⁷
, Kehu Yang ¹^,²^,³^,⁶^,⁷

Author information +

History +

PDF

Abstract

Objective: While prior investigations into the reporting of health economics (HE) have predominantly focused on guideline analyses at singular institutional or national levels, this study extends its scope to encompass diverse guidance documents issued transnationally across multiple institutions. Specifically, we evaluated the reporting of HE evidence in international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and expert consensus statements published between 2021 and 2023. The findings aim to inform the future revisions and development of such documents.

Methods: A systematic PubMed search identified relevant CPGs and expert consensus statements within a specified period. Two independent researchers screened the literature, extracted economic evidence integrated into these documents, and employed descriptive analysis to summarize the reporting characteristics.

Results: Of the 8931 screened publications, 3119 (34.9%) reported HE evidence. Among these 3119 publications, 237 (7.6%) incorporated HE evidence in formulating recommendations, 220 (7.1%) utilized HE evidence for evidence grading, and 2581 (82.8%) referenced HE evidence in explanatory notes accompanying the recommendations.

Conclusions: Current CPGs and expert consensus statements exhibit low rates of HE evidence reporting, indicating that most international guideline developers have overlooked their applications. HE evidence—through cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses—can optimize medical resource allocation, support clinicians in patient-centered economic decision-making, and enhance health outcomes. Future guideline development should prioritize HE evidence integration to advance the scientific rigor and clinical applicability of the recommendations.

Keywords

clinical practice guidelines / expert consensus statements / evidence-based medicine / health economics / reporting quality

Cite this article

Download citation ▾

Xin Xing, Guohua Zhang, Weize Kong, Liping Guo, Xiuxia Li, Zhipeng Wei, Yongbin Lu, Howard White, Yaolong Chen, Kehu Yang. Analysis of the Current Status and Characteristics of Health Economics Reporting in Clinical Practice Guidelines for 2021–2023. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2025, 18(3): e70062 DOI:10.1111/jebm.70062