Figure 15.5.b: Evers checklist (Evers 2005)

Item 
Yes 
No 

1. 
Is the study population clearly described? 
☐ 
☐ 

2. 
Are competing alternatives clearly described? 
☐ 
☐ 

3. 
Is a welldefined research question posed in answerable form? 
☐ 
☐ 

4. 
Is the economic study design appropriate to the stated objective? 
☐ 
☐ 

5. 
Is the chosen time horizon appropriate to include relevant costs and consequences? 
☐ 
☐ 

6. 
Is the actual perspective chosen appropriate? 
☐ 
☐ 

7. 
Are all important and relevant costs for each alternative identified? 
☐ 
☐ 

8. 
Are all costs measured appropriately in physical units? 
☐ 
☐ 

9. 
Are costs valued appropriately? 
☐ 
☐ 

10. 
Are all important and relevant outcomes for each alternative identified? 
☐ 
☐ 

11. 
Are all outcomes measured appropriately? 
☐ 
☐ 

12. 
Are outcomes valued appropriately? 
☐ 
☐ 

13. 
Is an incremental analysis of costs and outcomes of alternatives performed? 
☐ 
☐ 

14. 
Are all future costs and outcomes discounted appropriately? 
☐ 
☐ 

15. 
Are all important variables, whose values are uncertain, appropriately subjected to sensitivity analysis? 
☐ 
☐ 

16. 
Do the conclusions follow from the data reported? 
☐ 
☐ 

17. 
Does the study discuss the generalizability of the results to other settings and patient/ client groups? 
☐ 
☐ 

18. 
Does the article indicate that there is no potential conflict of interest of study researcher(s) and funder(s)? 
☐ 
☐ 

19. 
Are ethical and distributional issues discussed appropriately? 
☐ 
☐ 
