- Is this report really asking an economic question
- comparing well-defined alternative courses of action?
- with a specified point of view (a hospital, ministry of health or preferably society as a whole) from which the costs and effects are being viewed?
- Does it cite good evidence (that would meet criteria in thesingle study and the systematic review tables) of the efficacy of the alternatives?
- Does it identify alll the costs and effects you think it should and did it select credible measures for them?
Reference: Evidence-based Medicine – Sackett, Richardson, Rosenberg and Haynes.