Supplementary materials: Evaluation of reporting in time-driven activity-based costing studies on cardiovascular diseases: a scoping review

These are peer-reviewed supplementary materials for the article 'Evaluation of reporting in time-driven activity-based costing studies on cardiovascular diseases: a scoping review' published in the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research.Supplementary Table 1: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) ChecklistSupplemental Table 2: Search strategies used in each databaseSupplemental Table 3: Quality assessment using the TDABC Checklist (part I)Supplemental Table 3: Quality assessment using the TDABC Checklist (part II)Aim: This scoping review evaluates the application of the time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) methodology in cardiovascular disease (CVD) studies. Materials & methods: The evaluation was conducted using the 32-item TDABC Healthcare Consortium Consensus Statement Checklist. A systematic search was performed in Medline, Embase and Scopus in September 2023, including only full-text, peer-reviewed studies reporting the application of TDABC in CVD research. Results: Twenty studies were included in the review. The positive response rate for individual studies ranged from 31 to 81%. The most frequently addressed checklist item was the clear definition of study objectives, while presenting costs per patient included in the analysis was the least reported item. Although 70% of the studies achieved a positive response rate above 50%, adherence to the TDABC checklist remains inconsistent. Conclusion: There is significant room for improvement in the reporting of TDABC methodology in CVD studies. Providing a more comprehensive and standardized description of the methodology would enhance the utility, reproducibility and accuracy of the information generated, supporting the development of evidence-based health policies and improving accountability in healthcare cost assessments.