, Volume 16, Supplement 1, pp 85–89 | Cite as

Cochrane Reviews and Systematic Reviews of Economic Evaluations

Amantadine and Rimantadine in the Prevention and Treatment of Influenza
  • Tom Jefferson
  • Vittorio Demicheli
  • Daniela Rivetti
  • Jon Deeks
Section 4: The Socioeconomic Impact of Prevention and Control of Influenza Review Article


Cochrane reviews provide standardised and regularly updated syntheses of evidence on the effects of healthcare interventions. We present the rationale for, and some of the results of, a Cochrane review of the effects of amantadine and rimantadine in the prevention and treatment of influenza. The estimates of effect will be incorporated into a decision-making model for tackling influenza in healthy adults (i.e. soldiers in the British Army). Our systematic review of the economics of influenza also provides the international context within which economic data can be interpreted and assessed as a preliminary to an economic evaluation comparing alternative prevention and treatment strategies. Systematic reviews provide powerful and relatively inexpensive evidence of effects and tolerability, which is more likely to convince decision-makers than evidence from single studies. Additionally, they can be used to focus clinical trial questions and provide strategic insight regarding the state-of-the-art knowledge of effects and economics of compounds in a specific field.


Influenza Adis International Limited Healthy Adult Cochrane Review Amantadine 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Fact sheet – response to enquiries about journal selection or indexing at National Library of Medicine., Sep 1998Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mulrow CD. Rationale for systematic reviews. In: Chalmers I, Altman DG, editors. Systematic reviews. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 1995: 1–8Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jefferson TO. Vaccine trial data systematically assembled, pooled and disseminated by the Cochrane Collaboration. Vaccine 1998; 16: 1487–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wright LA, Demicheli V, Gillespie W, et al. Morbidity surveillance in the British Army – the first 12 months. J R Army Med Corps 1998; 144: 11–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McMenamin J, Morton R, McEwen J. Report of a pilot programme of enhanced surveillance of respiratory illness in the British Army (UK). Glasgow: Department of Public Health, University of Glasgow, 1998Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jefferson TO, Demicheli V, Deeks JJ. The effects of amantadine and rimantadine in the prophylaxis and treatment of influenza in healthy adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Acute Respiratory Infections Module); Update Software 1999: issue 1Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jefferson TO, Demicheli V. The socioeconomics of influenza. In: Nicholson, Hay and Webster, editors. Textbook of influenza. London: Blackwell, 1988: 541–7Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gray JAM. Where’s the chief knowledge officer? BMJ 1998; 317: 832PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jefferson T, Demicheli V. Relation between experimental and non-experimental study designs. HB vaccines: a case study. J Epidemiol Community Health 1999; 53 (1): 51–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tom Jefferson
    • 1
  • Vittorio Demicheli
    • 2
  • Daniela Rivetti
    • 3
  • Jon Deeks
    • 4
  1. 1.Cochrane Vaccines FieldUK Cochrane CentreCamberley, SurreyEngland
  2. 2.Institute of Medical StatisticsUniversity of PaviaPaviaItaly
  3. 3.Environmental Epidemiology Unit, ARPAAlessandriaItaly
  4. 4.Institute of Health SciencesOxfordEngland

Personalised recommendations