Critically analyse a published economic evaluation by Jones et al, 2023 (Jones et al. 2023. The Economic Potential of Smoking Cessation Interventions at the Point of Diagnosis of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.) The key documents including the paper you are analysing, the marking scheme, the structure and an example (good) essay are attached.
In writing the critical analysis, the word count for each section should be relative to the amount of marks awarded for each section.In conducting the critical appraisal, you are expected to go beyond summarising the paper. Your appraisal should examine the research to identify its strengths and weaknesses to judge its trustworthiness, quality and relevance in its context. The context outlined by the paper is the UK NHS, and this should provide the basis for the evaluation and policy recommendation.
In a report of no more than 3,000 words, consider the questions provided below in relation to the provided article.
Report structure:
Introduction briefly summarize the paper and state the objective of the report
Body of the report providing detailed answers to each of the questions below.
1. Is there evidence that the interventions effectiveness has been established? (Consider: Was the effectiveness study a randomised-controlled trial, systematic review or other approach? How valid was the study design used?)
2. What are the key data sources (e.g utilities, costs and probabilities) used and are they appropriate? Consider the quality of the data sources (Patients, experts or the general public and from what setting etc). Does the source or type of data impact the strength of findings and/or introduce a bias?
3. Are comparators and outcomes well described? Do the authors explain their modelling choices, and could a different/ more complex model or type of modelling have been used?
4. Around which variables is there most uncertainty and what does the sensitivity analysis say about the overall uncertainty surrounding the results? What are the implications of this uncertainty for study conclusions?
5. How is discounting used (if used)? How would changes in the discount rate impact results if there is no sensitivity analysis around discount rates?
6. Based on this study would you recommend that smoking cessation interventions at the point of diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer be introduced as a national policy? Justify yourrecommendation. Or what additional information would you want to have apart from this study to make a policy recommendation?
7. What are the directions for future research coming out of this study? (any mentioned by the authors, but also gaps you see)
8. What is the external validity of this study and what factors might be considered by other countries looking to interpret and use these results?
Conclusion briefly summarize the main conclusions of the appraisal exercise and state your assessment of the study.
Skip to content