Table 4 Breakdown of studies meeting each Drummond Criterion
Drummond criterion | Summary of criterion | Total studies meeting criterion n = 9 | Total studies not meeting criterion n = 9 | Total studies where criterion was not applicable n = 9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Was a well-defined question posed in answerable form? | 9 | 0 | 0 |
2 | Was a comprehensive description of the competing alternatives given? | 6 | 3 | 0 |
3 | Was there evidence that the programme’s effectiveness had been established? | 7 | 2 | 0 |
4 | Were all the important and relevant outcomes and costs for each alternative identified? | 6 | 3 | 0 |
5a | Were outcomes measured accurately in appropriate units prior to evaluation? | 9 | 0 | 0 |
5b | Were costs measured accurately in appropriate units prior to evaluation? | 9 | 0 | 0 |
6a | Were the outcomes valued credibly? | 9 | 0 | 0 |
6b | Were the costs valued credibly? | 9 | 0 | 0 |
7a | Were outcomes adjusted for different times at which they occurred? | 9 | 0 | 0 |
7b | Were costs adjusted for different times at which they occurred? | 3 | 6 | 0 |
8 | Was an incremental analysis of the outcomes and costs of alternatives performed? | 5 | 4 | 0 |
9 | Was allowance made for uncertainty in the estimates of costs and consequences? | 8 | 1 | 0 |
10 | Did the presentation and discussion of study results include all of the issues that are of concern to users? | 8 | 1 | 0 |