With respect to the analysis of the interventions' outcomes, similar positive results were found based on both approaches.
Comparability of interventions, outcomes and timing of assessments, and risk of bias were considered to determine potential for appropriate quantitative synthesis of the trials.
Second, economists are currently exploring a number of valuation paradigms that hold the promise of more appropriate valuation of public health interventions outcomes.
Evaluation of clinical heterogeneity was planned to be performed by examining various characteristics of the finally selected reports, such as the dissimilarity between the different types of interventions, outcomes, and patients.
They range from ideas about the context, ideas about the drivers of change, ideas about the cause-effect relationships between interventions, outcomes and context, as well as individual and organizational values.
The information on patients, methods, interventions, outcomes and results was extracted and summarized by two reviewers (SF and JZ) independently using a standardized data extraction form.
This may be due to the fact that this study was based on RCTs included in a real SR hence there was more consistency across trials with respect to a number of factors including populations, interventions, control interventions, outcomes, study design, and reporting.
Information regarding study details, such as interventions, outcomes, and modeling methods, was extracted.
A standardised data extraction recorded information on study context, population, interventions, outcomes and methodological quality.
Details about study design, participants, interventions, outcomes, risk of bias data and results were extracted.
Studies were heterogeneous with respect to interventions, outcomes and LHWs' roles.
