Skip to main content

Table 2 Eligibility criteria for study inclusion

From: "A systematic literature review of the epidemiology, clinical, economic and humanistic burden in recurrent respiratory papillomatosis”

PICOTS

Inclusion Criteria

Population

Juveniles and adults with RRP/laryngeal papillomatosis (stratification by age groups)

Interventions

No restriction

Comparisons

No restriction

Outcomes

Epidemiology burden:

Incidence

Prevalence

Mortality/survival

Proportion of RRP progressing to cancer

Tumor progression

Note: HPV genotype was also assessed to identify distinct types of HPV

Clinical burden:

Treatment complications

Risk factors

Symptoms

Humanistic burden:

All patient-reported outcomes such as voice impact or HRQoL instruments and utility values

Any disease specific and general PRO instruments

Utility

Economic review (cost and resource use and economic evaluations):

Intervention and comparator details

Evaluation details

Cost-analysis

Cost-effectiveness analysis

Resource use

Study design

Epidemiology burden:

Cohort studies including historical cohort studies and nested case–control studies

Cross-sectional studies

Registry/database studies

Clinical and humanistic burden:

Randomized controlled trials

Non-randomized controlled trials

Single arm trials

Cross-sectional and longitudinal database studies

Registry studies

Pragmatic clinical trials

Cohort studies /longitudinal studies (retrospective/prospective)

Case–control studies

Analysis of hospital records/database

All studies reporting utility values

Note: For clinical burden, clinical trials were deprioritized

Economic burden:

Cost studies/surveys/analyses

Database studies collecting cost data (e.g., claims databases and hospital records)

Cost resource use studies/surveys

Economic evaluations

Economic modelling studies

Observational cost studies

Timeframe

Database inception till date (November 2022)

Note: For clinical burden last ten years data was prioritized (2012–2022)

Regions

Global

Other

No language restriction was used in the searches. Studies with title and abstract in English and full text in non-English were evaluated on the basis of title and abstract

  1. PICOTS Population, intervention, comparisons, outcomes, time, study design