The exchangeability of self-reports and administrative health care resource use measurements: assessement of the methodological reporting quality

Objective: To assess the exchangeability of self-reported and administrative health care resource use measurements for cost estimation. Study Design and Setting: In a systematic review (NHS EED and MEDLINE), reviewers evaluate, in duplicate, the methodological reporting quality of studies comparing the validation evidence of instruments measuring health care resource use. The appraisal tool Methodological Reporting Quality (MeRQ) is developed by merging aspects form the Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies and the Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy. Results: Out of 173 studies, 35 full-text articles are assessed for eligibility. Sixteen articles are included in this study. In seven articles, more than 75% of the reporting criteria assessed by MERQ are considered "good." Most studies score at least "fair" on most of the reporting quality criteria. In the end, six studies score "good" on the minimal criteria for reporting. Varying levels of agreement among the different data sources are found, with correlations ranging from 0.14 up to 0.93 and with occurrences of both random and systematic errors. Conclusion: The validation evidence of the small number of studies with adequate MeRQ cautiously supports the exchangeability of both the self-reported and administrative resource use measurement methods.