A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders

PurposeUnderstanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist.ResultsAcross the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis.ConclusionWe describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.     

Racial matching and adolescent self-disclosure of substance use and mental health symptoms

Obtaining accurate assessment data from adolescents in treatment aids clinical decision making and facilitates more accurate outcome evaluations. However, findings could be biased due to underreported substance use and mental health symptoms. This article compares self-reports of youth in non-White matched client–assessor dyads and those in nonmatched dyads. There were no differences on self-reported substance use, but matched youth reported significantly fewer attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms versus the comparison group. One possible reason for these findings is the effect of in-group stereotype threat. Future studies should examine the potential effect that in-group stereotyping and perceived racism have on the therapeutic relationship.