As the base of clinical evidence grows, it is increasingly common to conduct economic evaluations in addition to clinical evaluations of effectiveness in order to inform health policies. For economic systematic reviews there is currently no agreed-upon quantitative method to obtain a pooled economic effect size. With no suitable quantitative method available, the hierarchical decision matrix stands out as a tool that enables a visual summary of different types of economic studies, but there are limitations with the hierarchical decision matrix. We extended the hierarchical decision matrix with a weighted scoring system (termed dominance ranking score) to allow for useful information of a study design to be incorporated. •The scoring system of the dominance ranking score incorporates weighting factors that are based on sample size and effect size of a study.•The dominance ranking score enables a more differentiating analysis of dominance levels.•For systematic reviews that include partial economic studies, both the hierarchical decision matrix and the dominance ranking score assist to indicate the level of economic potential for a particular intervention, which facilitates the conduct of subsequent full economic studies.
Keywords: Cost-benefit analysis; Costs and cost analysis; Evidence-Based Medicine; Medical Economics; Pharmaceutical Economics.
© 2020 The Author(s).