Table 2

Critical appraisal of selected studies.

StudyWell-defined question posed in answerable formComprehensive description of competing alternativesEffectiveness of programme or service establishedAll important and relevant costs and consequences for each alternative identifiedCosts and consequences measured accurately in appropriate physical unitsCosts and consequences valued crediblyCosts and consequences adjusted for differential timingIncremental analysis of costs and consequences of alternatives performedAllowance made for uncertainty in the estimates of costs and consequencesPresentation and discussion of study results included all issues of concern to users
UK Beam
 Trial Team17
Cochrane et al18
Hurley et al19
Hollinghurst et al20Productivity data not included in analysis due to missing valuesMissing costs for interventions, labour costs onlyMinimal discussion
Gusi et al21No secondary healthcare costs includedUnit costs only reported if significant difference between groupsNo references cited for unit costs
Handley et al22No healthcare costs as no difference between groupsUnit costs not reported, components listedSources not reported inferred but not explicit cost yearSensitivity analysis carried out; 10% missing values
Sevick et al23Sources not identified for unit costs
Munro et al24Treatment of control group not explicitNo measure of exercise. Primary care and personal costs not collected, only programme costsSources not identified for unit costs; little detail givenWeaknesses not well highlighted; practical (funder) considerations not mentioned
Dzator et al25Programme costs only; no quality-of-life measuresUnit costs not reported, components and methods istedSources not identified currency and year not specified
Elley et al11Not all sources cited
Dalziel et al10Not all sources cited
Isaacs et al26Control only followed for 6 months; intervention 12 monthsIntervention was not more effective than control
Elley et al27