Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ
Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/bmj.313.7052.275
复制
发表时间：
1996-08-03
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Jefferson, TO
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Drummond, MF;Jefferson, TO
在过去的十年里，人们对卫生保健干预措施的经济评估的兴趣有所上升。然而，对已发表的研究的回顾表明，工作质量存在差距。5早在1974年，威廉姆斯列出了经济评估的基本要素，6最近，德拉蒙德和他的同事列出了经济学家普遍同意的方法论领域。7经济评价指南已被许多机构颁布和审查，8‘14但很少有医学期刊有明确的同行审查经济评价指南，或始终如一地使用经济论文的经济学家评审员，尽管它们是经济评价的主要出版渠道。15--1995年1月，《英国医学杂志》成立了一个经济评估工作组，以提高提交和出版的经济文章的质量。我们的意图不是过度规定或扼杀创新方法；我们的重点是提高经济评估的清晰度。我们也没有解决其他准则中强调的那些行为问题。指南草案及其支持声明和清单已分发给卫生经济学家和杂志编辑，并在1996年1月英国卫生经济学家研究小组一年两次的会议上进行了辩论。对出席会议的成员进行了调查，以确定电子数据交换人员应使用的完整推荐人清单中的哪些项目。
Over the past decade interest in the economic evaluation of health care interventions has risen.'Reviews ofpublished studies have, however, shown gaps in the quality of work.5 As far back as 1974 Williams listed the essential elements of economic evaluations, 6 and more recently Drummond and colleagues set out the methodological areas generally agreed among economists. 7 Guidelines for economic evaluations have been promulgated and reviewed by many bodies, 8'14 but few medical journals have explicit guidelines for peer review of economic evaluations or consistently use economist reviewers for economic papers even though they are a major publication outlet for economic evaluations. 15-17 In January 1995 the BMJ set up a work-ing party on economic evaluation to improve the quality of submitted and published economic articles. It was not our intention to be unduly prescriptive or stifle innovative methods; our emphasis is on improving the clarity of economic evaluations. We also did not address those issues of conduct that have been empha-sised in other guidelines. 131'8Drafts of the guidelines and their supporting statement and the checklists have been circulated to health economists and journal editors and were debated at the biannual-meeting of the UK Health Economists' Study Group in January 1996. A survey of members attending the meeting was used to identify those items of the full referees' checklist that should be used by edi-tors.