Literature DB >> 21988292

Sample size determination for cost-effectiveness trials.

Andrew R Willan1.   

Abstract

Methods for determining sample size requirements for cost-effectiveness studies are reviewed and illustrated. Traditional methods based on tests of hypothesis and power arguments are given for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and incremental net benefit (INB). In addition, a full Bayesian approach using decision theory to determine optimal sample size is given for INB. The full Bayesian approach, based on the value of information, is proposed in reaction to concerns that traditional methods rely on arbitrarily chosen error probabilities and an ill-defined notion of the smallest clinically important difference. Furthermore, the results of cost-effectiveness studies are used for decision making (e.g. should a new intervention be adopted or the old one retained), and employing decision theory, which permits optimal use of current information and the optimal design of new studies, provides a more consistent approach.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21988292     DOI: 10.2165/11587130-000000000-00000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  59 in total

1.  Fieller's method and net health benefits.

Authors:  D F Heitjan
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.046

2.  Sample size and power issues in estimating incremental cost-effectiveness ratios from clinical trials data.

Authors:  A R Willan; B J O'Brien
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 3.046

3.  The value of information and optimal clinical trial design.

Authors:  Andrew R Willan; Eleanor M Pinto
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2005-06-30       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 4.  Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods.

Authors:  Anne G Copay; Brian R Subach; Steven D Glassman; David W Polly; Thomas C Schuler
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2007-04-02       Impact factor: 4.166

5.  Determining optimal sample sizes for multi-stage randomized clinical trials using value of information methods.

Authors:  Andrew Willan; Matthew Kowgier
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.486

6.  The option value of delay in health technology assessment.

Authors:  Simon Eckermann; Andrew R Willan
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2008-05-13       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Accounting for between-study variation in incremental net benefit in value of information methodology.

Authors:  Andrew R Willan; Simon Eckermann
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2011-09-01       Impact factor: 3.046

8.  Confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios: an application of Fieller's theorem.

Authors:  A R Willan; B J O'Brien
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1996 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.046

9.  Argon green vs. krypton red laser photocoagulation for extrafoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration: 3-year results of a multicentre randomized trial. Canadian Ophthalmology Study Group.

Authors:  A R Willan; A F Cruess; M Ballantyne
Journal:  Can J Ophthalmol       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 1.882

10.  Confidence intervals for cost/effectiveness ratios.

Authors:  P Wakker; M P Klaassen
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1995 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.046

View more
  7 in total

1.  A non-linear beta-binomial regression model for mapping EORTC QLQ- C30 to the EQ-5D-3L in lung cancer patients: a comparison with existing approaches.

Authors:  Iftekhar Khan; Stephen Morris
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 3.186

2.  Bayesian sample size determination for cost-effectiveness studies with censored data.

Authors:  Daniel P Beavers; James D Stamey
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale is an adequate screening instrument for depression and anxiety disorder in adults with congential heart disease.

Authors:  Ju Ryoung Moon; June Huh; Jinyoung Song; I-Seok Kang; Seung Woo Park; Sung-A Chang; Ji-Hyuk Yang; Tae-Gook Jun
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 3.186

4.  Cost-Effectiveness of Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Surgery for Different Surgical Procedures: Protocol for a Prospective, Multicentric Study (ROBOCOSTES).

Authors:  Benedetto Ielpo; Mauro Podda; Fernando Burdio; Patricia Sanchez-Velazquez; Maria-Alejandra Guerrero; Javier Nuñez; Miguel Toledano; Salvador Morales-Conde; Julio Mayol; Manuel Lopez-Cano; Eloy Espín-Basany; Gianluca Pellino
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-05-06

5.  The effect of fines on nonattendance in public hospital outpatient clinics: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Emely Ek Blæhr; Thomas Kristensen; Ulla Væggemose; Rikke Søgaard
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2016-06-13       Impact factor: 2.279

6.  Value of Information Analysis Informing Adoption and Research Decisions in a Portfolio of Health Care Interventions.

Authors:  Haitham W Tuffaha; Louisa G Gordon; Paul A Scuffham
Journal:  MDM Policy Pract       Date:  2016-07-07

7.  Choosing the target difference and undertaking and reporting the sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial - the development of the DELTA2 guidance.

Authors:  William Sones; Steven A Julious; Joanne C Rothwell; Craig Robert Ramsay; Lisa V Hampson; Richard Emsley; Stephen J Walters; Catherine Hewitt; Martin Bland; Dean A Fergusson; Jesse A Berlin; Doug Altman; Luke David Vale; Jonathan Alistair Cook
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 2.279

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.