Literature DB >> 12962334

Reporting the cost-effectiveness of interventions with nonsignificant effect differences: example from a trial of secondary prevention of coronary heart disease.

Katharine Johnston1, Alastair Gray, Michael Moher, Patricia Yudkin, Lucy Wright, David Mant.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study reports the cost-effectiveness of interventions with nonsignificant differences in effect, and considers reporting of cost-effectiveness in situations where nonsignificant differences arise in some but not all end points.
METHODS: Data on costs and effects associated with three end points (adequate assessment, risk factors, and life-years) were derived from a trial of methods to promote secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Incremental cost per life-year gained figures were calculated, and the uncertainty around these was displayed on cost-effectiveness planes in the form of ellipses.
RESULTS: There was a significant difference in one of the intermediate end points (adequate assessment) but nonsignificant differences in the other intermediate end point (risk factors) and the final end point (life-years). Estimation of cost per life-year figures revealed the cost-effectiveness of the interventions to be unfavorable.
CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effectiveness ratios based on final end points should be calculated even in situations where nonsignificant differences in life-years arise, to avoid publication bias and to provide decision makers with useful information. Uncertainty in the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios should be estimated and presented graphically.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12962334     DOI: 10.1017/s0266462303000412

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  7 in total

1.  Long-term cost effectiveness of cardiac secondary prevention in primary care in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Authors:  Paddy Gillespie; Edel Murphy; Susan M Smith; Margaret E Cupples; Molly Byrne; Andrew W Murphy
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2016-03-09

2.  Relative cost effectiveness of the SPHERE intervention in selected patient subgroups with existing coronary heart disease.

Authors:  Paddy Gillespie; Eamon O'Shea; Andrew W Murphy; Susan M Smith; Mary C Byrne; Molly Byrne; Margaret E Cupples
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2011-05-03

3.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of three health interventions to prevent malaria in pregnancy in an area of low transmission in Uganda.

Authors:  Kristian Schultz Hansen; Richard Ndyomugyenyi; Pascal Magnussen; Siân E Clarke
Journal:  Int Health       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 2.473

4.  Economic analysis of radiation therapy oncology group 97-14: multiple versus single fraction radiation treatment of patients with bone metastases.

Authors:  Andre Konski; Jennifer James; William Hartsell; Mark H Leibenhaut; Nora Janjan; Walter Curran; Mack Roach; Deborah Watkins-Bruner
Journal:  Am J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.339

5.  Cost-effectiveness of intermittent preventive treatment of malaria in infants (IPTi) for averting anaemia in Gabon: a comparison between intention to treat and according to protocol analyses.

Authors:  Elisa Sicuri; Prosper Biao; Guy Hutton; Fabrizio Tediosi; Clara Menendez; Bertrand Lell; Peter Kremsner; Lesong Conteh; Martin P Grobusch
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2011-10-17       Impact factor: 2.979

6.  Peer support in type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial in primary care with parallel economic and qualitative analyses: pilot study and protocol.

Authors:  Gillian M Paul; Susan M Smith; David L Whitford; Eamon O'Shea; Fergus O'Kelly; Tom O'Dowd
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2007-07-31       Impact factor: 2.497

7.  Methods for analyzing cost effectiveness data from cluster randomized trials.

Authors:  Max O Bachmann; Lara Fairall; Allan Clark; Miranda Mugford
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2007-09-06
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.