• Hariharan, S., Israni, A. K. & Danovitch, G. Long-term survival after kidney transplantation. N. Engl. J. Med. 385, 729–743 (2021).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Himmelfarb, J., Vanholder, R., Mehrotra, R. & Tonelli, M. The current and future landscape of dialysis. Nat. Rev. Nephrol. 16, 573–585 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Thurlow, J. S. et al. Global epidemiology of end-stage kidney disease and disparities in kidney replacement therapy. Am. J. Nephrol. 52, 98–107 (2021).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Harris, D. C. H. et al. Increasing access to integrated ESKD care as part of universal health coverage. Kidney Int. 95, S1–S33 (2019).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Francis, A. et al. Chronic kidney disease and the global public health agenda: an international consensus. Nat. Rev. Nephrol. 20, 473–485 (2024).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Liyanage, T. et al. Worldwide access to treatment for end-stage kidney disease: a systematic review. Lancet 385, 1975–1982 (2015).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Lunney, M. et al. Availability, accessibility, and quality of conservative kidney management worldwide. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 16, 79–87 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kaur, G. et al. Cost of hemodialysis in a public sector tertiary hospital of India. Clin. Kidney J. 11, 726–733 (2018).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ashuntantang, G. et al. Outcomes in adults and children with end-stage kidney disease requiring dialysis in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review. Lancet Glob. Health 5, e408–e417 (2017).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Olowu, W. A. et al. Outcomes of acute kidney injury in children and adults in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review. Lancet Glob. Health 4, e242–e250 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Jamison, D. T. et al. Disease Control Priorities: Improving Health and Reducing Poverty. 3rd edn Vol. 9 (World Bank, 2017); https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0527-1.

  • Teerawattananon, Y., Dabak, S. V., Khoe, L. C., Bayani, D. B. S. & Isaranuwatchai, W. To include or not include: renal dialysis policy in the era of universal health coverage. BMJ 368, m82 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Luyckx, V. A., Miljeteig, I., Ejigu, A. M. & Moosa, M. R. Ethical challenges in the provision of dialysis in resource-constrained environments. Semin. Nephrol. 37, 273–286 (2017).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Okpechi, I. G. et al. Building optimal and sustainable kidney care in low resource settings: the role of healthcare systems. Nephrology 26, 948–960 (2021).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Katz, I. J., Gerntholtz, T. & Naicker, S. Africa and nephrology: the forgotten continent. Nephron Clin. Pract. 117, 320–327 (2010).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Van Biesen, W. et al. Considerations on equity in management of end-stage kidney disease in low- and middle-income countries. Kidney Int. Suppl. 10, e63–e71 (2020).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M. J., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G. L., Torrance, G. W. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford Univ. Press2015.


    Google Scholar
     

  • World Health Organization. 2015 Global Survey on Health Technology Assessment by National Authorities: Main Findings. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/375063/9789241509749-eng.pdf?sequence=1 (2015).

  • Kim, D. D. et al. Developing criteria for health economic quality evaluation tool. Value Health 26, 1225–1234 (2023).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Caro, J. J., Briggs, A. H., Siebert, U. & Kuntz, K. M. Modeling good research practices — overview: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM modeling good research practices task force-1. Value Health 15, 796–803 (2012).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Edwards, R. T. & McIntosh, E. (eds). Applied Health Economics for Public Health Practice and Research (Oxford Univ. Press, 2019); https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780198737483.001.0001.

  • Meltzer, M. I. Introduction to health economics for physicians. Lancet 358, 993–998 (2001).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Roberts, M. et al. Conceptualizing a model: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM modeling good research practices task force-2. Value Health 15, 804–811 (2012).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Davies, M. & Cassimjee, Z. Provision of long-term renal replacement therapy to non-national patients in South Africa. South. Afr. Med. J. 111, 615 (2021).

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Thaweethamcharoen, T., Sritippayawan, S., Noparatayaporn, P. & Aiyasanon, N. Cost-utility analysis of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and automated peritoneal dialysis for Thai patients with end-stage renal disease. Value Health Reg. Issues 21, 181–187 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bayani, D. B. S. et al. Filtering for the best policy: an economic evaluation of policy options for kidney replacement coverage in the Philippines. Nephrology 26, 170–177 (2021).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Li, B. et al. Equity–efficiency trade-offs associated with alternative approaches to deceased donor kidney allocation: a patient-level simulation. Transplantation 104, 795–803 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Spinowitz, B. et al. Economic and quality of life burden of anemia on patients with CKD on dialysis: a systematic review. J. Med. Econ. 22, 593–604 (2019).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Gupta, D. et al. Peritoneal dialysis — first initiative in India: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Clin. Kidney J. 15, 128–135 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Erbe, A. W., Kendzia, D., Busink, E., Carroll, S. & Aas, E. Value of an integrated home dialysis model in the United Kingdom: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Value Health 26, 984–994 (2023).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chalkidou, K., Culyer, A. J. & Nemzoff, C. Perspective in Economic Evaluations of Health Care Interventions in Low- and Middle-Income Countries — One Size Does Not Fit All. https://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/perspective-economic-evaluations-healthcare-interventions-low-and-middle-income.pdf (Center for Global Development, 2018).

  • Sittimart, M. et al. An overview of the perspectives used in health economic evaluations. Cost. Eff. Resour. Alloc.22, 41 (2024).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Drummond, M. et al. Transferability of economic evaluations across jurisdictions: ISPOR good research practices task force report. Value Health 12, 409–418 (2009).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sassi, F. Calculating QALYs, comparing QALY and DALY calculations. Health Policy Plan. 21, 402–408 (2006).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Donnelly, J. Comparative effectiveness research (updated). Health Aff. (Millwood) https://doi.org/10.1377/hpb20101008.552571 (2010).

  • Rand, L. Z. & Kesselheim, A. S. Controversy over using quality-adjusted life-years in cost-effectiveness analyses: a systematic literature review. Health Aff. 40, 1402–1410 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Beresniak, A. et al. Validation of the underlying assumptions of the quality-adjusted life-years outcome: results from the ECHOUTCOME European project. Pharmacoeconomics 33, 61–69 (2015).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Anand, S. & Hanson, K. Disability-adjusted life years: a critical review. J. Health Econ. 16, 685–702 (1997).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Tomeny, E. M. et al. Rethinking tuberculosis morbidity quantification: a systematic review and critical appraisal of TB disability weights in cost-effectiveness analyses. Pharmacoeconomics 42, 1209–1236 (2024).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Arnesen, T. & Nord, E. The value of DALY life: problems with ethics and validity of disability adjusted life years. BMJ 319, 1423–1425 (1999).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sanders, G. D. et al. Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 316, 1093–1103 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sharma, D., Aggarwal, A. K., Downey, L. E. & Prinja, S. National healthcare economic evaluation guidelines: a cross-country comparison. Pharmacoecon. Open. 5, 349–364 (2021).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Daccache, C., Karam, R., Rizk, R., Evers, S. M. A. A. & Hiligsmann, M. The development process of economic evaluation guidelines in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 38, e35 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Verguet, S., Kim, J. J. & Jamison, D. T. Extended cost-effectiveness analysis for health policy assessment: a tutorial. Pharmacoeconomics 34, 913–923 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Norheim, O. F. et al. Guidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis. Cost. Eff. Resour. Alloc. 12, 18 (2014).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Elsayed, M. E., Morris, A. D., Li, X., Browne, L. D. & Stack, A. G. Propensity score matched mortality comparisons of peritoneal and in-centre haemodialysis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 35, 2172–2182 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Luo, P.-T. et al. Impact of peritoneal dialysis modality on patient and PD survival: a systematic review. Perit. Dial. Int. 43, 128–138 (2023).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chander, S. et al. Mortality and mode of dialysis: meta-analysis and systematic review. BMC Nephrol. 25, 1 (2024).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cheng, L., Hu, N., Song, D. & Chen, Y. Mortality of peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis in older adults: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Gerontology 70, 461–478 (2024).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Zazzeroni, L., Pasquinelli, G., Nanni, E., Cremonini, V. & Rubbi, I. Comparison of quality of life in patients undergoing hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Kidney Blood Press. Res. 42, 717–727 (2017).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chauhan, A. S. et al. Validating the rigour of adaptive methods of economic evaluation. BMJ Glob. Health 8, e012277 (2023).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Karopadi, A. N., Mason, G., Rettore, E. & Ronco, C. Cost of peritoneal dialysis and haemodialysis across the world. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 28, 2553–2569 (2013).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ready, A. R., Nath, J., Milford, D. V., Adu, D. & Jewitt-Harris, J. Establishing sustainable kidney transplantation programs in developing world countries: a 10-year experience. Kidney Int. 90, 916–920 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Nemzoff, C. et al. Rapid cost-effectiveness analysis: hemodialysis versus peritoneal dialysis for patients with acute kidney injury in Rwanda. Cost. Eff. Resour. Alloc. 22, 35 (2024).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Wilkinson, T. et al. The international decision support initiative reference case for economic evaluation: an aid to thought. Value Health 19, 921–928 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Attema, A. E., Brouwer, W. B. F. & Claxton, K. Discounting in economic evaluations. Pharmacoeconomics 36, 745–758 (2018).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Haacker, M., Hallett, T. B. & Atun, R. On discount rates for economic evaluations in global health. Health Policy Plan. 35, 107–114 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Haacker, M., Hallett, T. B. & Atun, R. On time horizons in health economic evaluations. Health Policy Plan. 35, 1237–1243 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Adeagbo, C. U., Rattanavipapong, W., Guinness, L. & Teerawattananon, Y. The development of the guide to economic analysis and research (GEAR) online resource for low- and middle-income countries’ health economics practitioners: a commentary. Value Health 21, 569–572 (2018).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bertram, M. Y., Lauer, J. A., Stenberg, K. & Edejer, T. T. T. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care interventions for priority setting in the health system: an update from WHO CHOICE. Int. J. Health Policy Manag. 10, 673–677 (2021).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Technologies: Canada 4th edn. https://www.cda-amc.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/guidelines_for_the_economic_evaluation_of_health_technologies_canada_4th_ed.pdf (2017).

  • Harper, A., Mustafee, N. & Yearworth, M. Facets of trust in simulation studies. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 289, 197–213 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Stahl, J. E. Modelling methods for pharmacoeconomics and health technology assessment. Pharmacoeconomics 26, 131–148 (2008).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Siebert, U. et al. State-transition modeling. Med. Decis. Mak. 32, 690–700 (2012).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Soares, M. et al. Recommendations on the use of structured expert elicitation protocols for healthcare decision making: a good practices report of an ISPOR task force. Value Health 27, 1469–1478 (2024).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Goeree, R. et al. Transferability of economic evaluations: approaches and factors to consider when using results from one geographic area for another. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 23, 671–682 (2007).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Teerawattananon, Y. & Tritasavit, N. A learning experience from price negotiations for vaccines. Vaccine 33, A11–A12 (2015).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Turner, H. C., Lauer, J. A., Tran, B. X., Teerawattananon, Y. & Jit, M. Adjusting for inflation and currency changes within health economic studies. Value Health 22, 1026–1032 (2019).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Vassall, A. et al. Reference Case for Estimating the Costs of Global Health Services and Interventions. https://ghcosting.org/pages/standards/reference_case (2017).

  • NICE Decision Support Unit. Survival Analysis TSD. https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/nice-dsu/tsds/survival-analysis (2022).

  • Coyle, D., Haines, A. & Lee, K. Extrapolating Clinical Evidence within Economic Evaluations: CADTH Methods and Guidelines (Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2023); https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK594389/.

  • Afiatin et al. Economic evaluation of policy options for dialysis in end-stage renal disease patients under the universal health coverage in Indonesia. PLoS ONE12, e0177436 (2017).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Wyld, M., Morton, R. L., Hayen, A., Howard, K. & Webster, A. C. A systematic review and meta-analysis of utility-based quality of life in chronic kidney disease treatments. PLoS Med. 9, e1001307 (2012).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Liem, Y. S., Bosch, J. L. & Hunink, M. G. M. Preference-based quality of life of patients on renal replacement therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Value Health 11, 733–741 (2008).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chuasuwan, A., Pooripussarakul, S., Thakkinstian, A., Ingsathit, A. & Pattanaprateep, O. Comparisons of quality of life between patients underwent peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 18, 191 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Jensen, C. E., Sørensen, P. & Petersen, K. D. In Denmark kidney transplantation is more cost-effective than dialysis. Dan. Med. J. 61, A4796 (2014).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Global Burden of Disease Collaborative Network. Global Burden of Disease Study 2021 (GBD 2021) Disability Weights (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, 2024); https://doi.org/10.6069/485b-dx41.

  • Bilcke, J. & Beutels, P. Generating, presenting, and interpreting cost-effectiveness results in the context of uncertainty: a tutorial for deeper knowledge and better practice. Med. Decis. Mak. 42, 421–435 (2022).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sullivan, S. D. et al. Budget impact analysis — principles of good practice: report of the ISPOR 2012 budget impact analysis good practice II task force. Value Health 17, 5–14 (2014).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mauskopf, J. A. et al. Principles of good practice for budget impact analysis: report of the ISPOR task force on good research practices — budget impact analysis. Value Health 10, 336–347 (2007).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Briggs, A. H. et al. Model parameter estimation and uncertainty: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM modeling good research practices task force-6. Value Health 15, 835–842 (2012).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chen, H.-F. et al. The magnitude of the health and economic impact of increased organ donation on patients with end-stage renal disease. MDM Policy Pract. 6, 23814683211063418 (2021).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Axelrod, D. A. et al. An economic assessment of contemporary kidney transplant practice. Am. J. Transplant. 18, 1168–1176 (2018).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • NICE. in NICE Health Technology Evaluations: The Manual (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 2023).

  • Thokala, P., Ochalek, J., Leech, A. A. & Tong, T. Cost-effectiveness thresholds: the past, the present and the future. Pharmacoeconomics 36, 509–522 (2018).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Isaranuwatchai, W. et al. An empirical study looking at the potential impact of increasing cost-effectiveness threshold on reimbursement decisions in Thailand. Health Policy Technol. 13, 100927 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bertram, M. Y. et al. Cost–effectiveness thresholds: pros and cons. Bull. World Health Organ. 94, 925 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mangoya, D., Barham, L., Moyo, E., Moyo, P. & Dzinamarira, T. The use of economic evaluation tools in essential health benefits package selection for universal health coverage. Value Health Reg. Issues 36, 1–9 (2023).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Eregata, G. T. et al. Generalised cost-effectiveness analysis of 159 health interventions for the Ethiopian essential health service package. Cost. Eff. Resour. Alloc. 19, 2 (2021).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Eckman, M. H., Woodle, E. S., Thakar, C. V., Alloway, R. R. & Sherman, K. E. Cost-effectiveness of using kidneys from HCV-viremic donors for transplantation into HCV-uninfected recipients. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 75, 857–867 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Pichon-Riviere, A., Drummond, M., Palacios, A., Garcia-Marti, S. & Augustovski, F. Determining the efficiency path to universal health coverage: cost-effectiveness thresholds for 174 countries based on growth in life expectancy and health expenditures. Lancet Glob. Health 11, e833–e842 (2023).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sampson, C. et al. Supply-side cost-effectiveness thresholds: questions for evidence-based policy. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 20, 651–667 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Strong, M., Oakley, J. E. & Chilcott, J. Managing structural uncertainty in health economic decision models: a discrepancy approach. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. C. Appl. Stat. 61, 25–45 (2012).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Haji Ali Afzali, H., Bojke, L. & Karnon, J. Model structuring for economic evaluations of new health technologies. Pharmacoeconomics 36, 1309–1319 (2018).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Jackson, C. H. et al. Value of information analysis in models to inform health policy. Annu. Rev. Stat. Appl. 9, 95 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Senanayake, S., Healy, H., McPhail, S. M., Baboolal, K. & Kularatna, S. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of implementing a ‘Soft Opt-Out’ system for kidney donation in Australia. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 20, 769–779 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Botwright, S., Win, E. M., Kapol, N., Benjawan, S. & Teerawattananon, Y. Cost-utility analysis of universal maternal pertussis immunisation in Thailand: a comparison of two model structures. Pharmacoeconomics 41, 77–91 (2023).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rothery, C. et al. Value of information analytical methods: report 2 of the ISPOR value of information analysis emerging good practices task force. Value Health 23, 277–286 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Fenwick, E. et al. Value of information analysis for research decisions — an introduction: report 1 of the ISPOR value of information analysis emerging good practices task force. Value Health 23, 139–150 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Fenwick, E., Marshall, D. A., Levy, A. R. & Nichol, G. Using and interpreting cost-effectiveness acceptability curves: an example using data from a trial of management strategies for atrial fibrillation. BMC Health Serv. Res. 6, 52 (2006).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Jackson, C., et al. A guide to value of information methods for prioritising research in health impact modelling. Epidemiol. Methods 10, 20210012.

  • Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program. Guidelines comparison. Guide to Economic Analysis and Research (GEAR) Online Resource. https://www.gear4health.com/gear/health-economic-evaluation-guidelines (2024).

  • Philips, Z., Bojke, L., Sculpher, M., Claxton, K. & Golder, S. Good practice guidelines for decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. Pharmacoeconomics 24, 355–371 (2006).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Husereau, D. et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) statement: updated reporting guidance for health economic evaluations. Pharmacoeconomics 40, 601–609 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Eddy, D. M. et al. Model transparency and validation. Med. Decis. Mak. 32, 733–743 (2012).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • World Health Organization. Value-based Pricing: WHO Guideline on Country Pharmaceutical Pricing Policies. A Plain Language Summary. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/341896/9789240024595-eng.pdf (2021).

  • Domínguez, J., Harrison, R. & Atal, R. Cost–benefit estimation of cadaveric kidney transplantation: the case of a developing country. Transpl. Proc. 43, 2300–2304 (2011).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hryshchuk, S. M. & Parii, V. D. Cost-effectiveness of dialysis and kidney transplantation to treat end-stage renal disease in Ukraine. Wiad. Lekarskie 77, 765–771 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rosselli, D., Rueda, J.-D. & Diaz, C. Cost-effectiveness of kidney transplantation compared with chronic dialysis in end-stage renal disease. Saudi J. Kidney Dis. Transplant. 26, 733 (2015).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Moradpour, A., Hadian, M. & Tavakkoli, M. Economic evaluation of end stage renal disease treatments in Iran. Clin. Epidemiol. Glob. Health 8, 199–204 (2020).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hong, Z. et al. Economic evaluation of three dialysis methods in patients with end-stage renal disease in China. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 55, 1247–1254 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Pike, E., Hamidi, V., Ringerike, T., Wisloff, T. & Klemp, M. More use of peritoneal dialysis gives significant savings: a systematic review and health economic decision model. J. Clin. Med. Res. 9, 104–116 (2017).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Putri, S. et al. Supporting dialysis policy for end stage renal disease (ESRD) in Indonesia: an updated cost-effectiveness model. BMC Res. Notes 15, 359 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sinclair, A. et al. Dialysis Modalities for the Treatment of End-Stage Kidney Disease: A Health Technology Assessment. CADTH Optimal Use Report No. 6.2b (Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2017); https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK531991/.

  • Yang, F., Lau, T. & Luo, N. Cost-effectiveness of haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis for patients with end-stage renal disease in Singapore. Nephrology 21, 669–677 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Liu, J. et al. Financial implications of dialysis modalities in the developing world: a Chinese perspective. Perit. Dial. Int. 40, 193–201 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Haller, M., Gutjahr, G., Kramar, R., Harnoncourt, F. & Oberbauer, R. Cost-effectiveness analysis of renal replacement therapy in Austria. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 26, 2988–2995 (2011).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Shimizu, U. et al. Cost-effectiveness achieved through changing the composition of renal replacement therapy in Japan. J. Med. Econ. 15, 444–453 (2012).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Surendra, N. K. et al. Cost utility analysis of end stage renal disease treatment in Ministry of Health dialysis centres, Malaysia: hemodialysis versus continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. PLoS ONE14, e0218422 (2019).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Villa, G. et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of the Spanish renal replacement therapy program. Perit. Dial. Int. 32, 192–199 (2012).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Treharne, C., Liu, F. X., Arici, M., Crowe, L. & Farooqui, U. Peritoneal dialysis and in-centre haemodialysis: a cost-utility analysis from a UK payer perspective. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 12, 409–420 (2014).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Yang, F., Liao, M., Wang, P. & Liu, Y. Cost-effectiveness analysis of renal replacement therapy strategies in Guangzhou city, southern China. BMJ Open. 11, e039653 (2021).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Yousefi, M., Rezaei, S., Hajebrahimi, S., Falsafi, N. & Keshvari-Shad, F. Peritoneal dialysis vs. hemodialysis among patients with end-stage renal disease in Iran: which is more cost-effective? BMC Nephrol. 25, 85 (2024).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Beby, A. T., Cornelis, T., Zinck, R. & Liu, F. X. Cost-effectiveness of high dose hemodialysis in comparison to conventional in-center hemodialysis in the Netherlands. Adv. Ther. 33, 2032–2048 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Liu, F. X., Treharne, C., Arici, M., Crowe, L. & Culleton, B. High-dose hemodialysis versus conventional in-center hemodialysis: a cost-utility analysis from a UK payer perspective. Value Health 18, 17–24 (2015).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ramponi, F. et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of online hemodiafiltration versus high-flux hemodialysis. Clinicoecon. Outcomes Res. 8, 531–540 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Augustyńska, J. et al. Automated peritoneal dialysis with remote patient monitoring: clinical effects and economic consequences for Poland. Value Health Reg. Issues 40, 53–62 (2024).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Moosa, M. R., Maree, J. D., Chirehwa, M. T. & Benatar, S. R. Use of the ‘Accountability for Reasonableness’ approach to improve fairness in accessing dialysis in a middle-income country. PLoS ONE11, e0164201 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kiberd, B. A., Tennankore, K. K. & Vinson, A. J. Comparing the net benefits of adult deceased donor kidney transplantation for a patient on the preemptive waiting list vs a patient receiving dialysis. JAMA Netw. Open 5, e2223325 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Senanayake, S. et al. Deceased donor kidney allocation: an economic evaluation of contemporary longevity matching practices. BMC Health Serv. Res. 20, 931 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Smith, J. M. et al. Cost implications of new national allocation policy for deceased donor kidneys in the United States. Transplantation 100, 879–885 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Wong, C. K. H. et al. Lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line dialysis modalities for patients with end-stage renal disease under peritoneal dialysis first policy. BMC Nephrol. 21, 42 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Axelrod, D. A. et al. The clinical and economic benefit of CMV matching in kidney transplant: a decision analysis. Transplantation 106, 1227–1232 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bamforth, R. J. et al. Expanding access to high KDPI kidney transplant for recipients aged 60 y and older: cost utility and survival. Transpl. Direct 10, e1629 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ellison, T. A. et al. Evaluating cost-effectiveness in using high-kidney donor profile index organs. Transpl. Proc. 55, 2333–2344 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hedley, J. A. et al. Cost-effectiveness of interventions to increase utilization of kidneys from deceased donors with primary brain malignancy in an Australian setting. Transpl. Direct 9, e1474 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kadatz, M., Klarenbach, S., Gill, J. & Gill, J. S. Cost-effectiveness of using kidneys from hepatitis C nucleic acid test-positive donors for transplantation in hepatitis C-negative recipients. Am. J. Transplant. 18, 2457–2464 (2018).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Senanayake, S. et al. Donor kidney quality and transplant outcome: an economic evaluation of contemporary practice. Value Health 23, 1561–1569 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Shah, K. K. et al. Cost-effectiveness of kidney transplantation from donors at increased risk of blood-borne virus infection transmission. Transplantation 107, 2028–2042 (2023).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Koto, P. et al. An ex-ante cost-utility analysis of the deemed consent legislation compared to expressed consent for kidney transplantations in Nova Scotia. Cost. Eff. Resour. Alloc. 20, 55 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cavallo, M. C. et al. Cost-effectiveness of kidney transplantation from DCD in Italy. Transpl. Proc. 46, 3289–3296 (2014).

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Barnieh, L., Gill, J. S., Klarenbach, S. & Manns, B. J. The cost-effectiveness of using payment to increase living donor kidneys for transplantation. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 8, 2165–2173 (2013).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Karnon, J. et al. Modeling using discrete event simulation. Med. Decis. Mak. 32, 701–711 (2012).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program. Plant-A-Tree — an open access decision tree builder. Guide to Economic Analysis and Research (GEAR) Online Resource. https://www.gear4health.com/page/i/plant-a-tree (2024).

  • Manns, B. J., Taub, K. J. & Donaldson, C. Economic evaluation and end-stage renal disease: from basics to bedside. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 36, 12–28 (2000).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Glossary: Health Economic Terms. https://yhec.co.uk/resources/glossary/ (York Health Economics Consortium, 2016).

  • Glossary of Terms for Health Economics and Systematic Review. https://methods.cochrane.org/economics/sites/methods.cochrane.org.economics/files/public/uploads/ccemg_website_glossary.pdf.

  • International Society of Nephrology. The ISN Framework for Developing Dialysis Programs in Low-Resource Settings. https://www.theisn.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/ISN-Framework-Dialysis-Report-HIRES.pdf (2021).

  • Bertram, M., Dhaene, G. & Tan-Torres Edejer, T. (eds). Institutionalizing Health Technology Assessment Mechanisms: A How to Guide. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240020665 (World Health Organization, 2021).