Literature DB >> 23807751

Good practice guidelines for the use of statistical regression models in economic evaluations.

Ben Kearns1, Roberta Ara, Allan Wailoo, Andrea Manca, Monica Hernández Alava, Keith Abrams, Mike Campbell.   

Abstract

Decision-analytic models (DAMs) used to evaluate the cost effectiveness of interventions are pivotal sources of evidence used in economic evaluations. Parameter estimates used in the DAMs are often based on the results of a regression analysis, but there is little guidance relating to these. This study had two objectives. The first was to identify the frequency of use of regression models in economic evaluations, the parameters they inform, and the amount of information reported to describe and support the analyses. The second objective was to provide guidance to improve practice in this area, based on the review. The review concentrated on a random sample of economic evaluations submitted to the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of its technology appraisal process. Based on these findings, recommendations for good practice were drafted, together with a checklist for critiquing reporting standards in this area. Based on the results of this review, statistical regression models are in widespread use in DAMs used to support economic evaluations, yet reporting of basic information, such as the sample size used and measures of uncertainty, is limited. Recommendations were formed about how reporting standards could be improved to better meet the needs of decision makers. These recommendations are summarised in a checklist, which may be used by both those conducting regression analyses and those critiquing them, to identify what should be reported when using the results of a regression analysis within a DAM.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23807751     DOI: 10.1007/s40273-013-0069-y

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


  10 in total

1.  Preference-Based EQ-5D index scores for chronic conditions in the United States.

Authors:  Patrick W Sullivan; Vahram Ghushchyan
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  Predicting the short form-6D preference-based index using the eight mean short form-36 health dimension scores: estimating preference-based health-related utilities when patient level data are not available.

Authors:  Roberta Ara; John Brazier
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2008-07-18       Impact factor: 5.725

3.  Catalogue of EQ-5D scores for the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Patrick W Sullivan; Julia F Slejko; Mark J Sculpher; Vahram Ghushchyan
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-03-21       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 4.  Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Mark
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Model parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force Working Group-6.

Authors:  Andrew H Briggs; Milton C Weinstein; Elisabeth A L Fenwick; Jonathan Karnon; Mark J Sculpher; A David Paltiel
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.

Authors:  Don Husereau; Michael Drummond; Stavros Petrou; Chris Carswell; David Moher; Dan Greenberg; Federico Augustovski; Andrew H Briggs; Josephine Mauskopf; Elizabeth Loder
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Statistics and ethics in medical research. VI--Presentation of results.

Authors:  D G Altman
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1980-12-06

8.  Use of Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods to model cost-of-illness data.

Authors:  Nicola J Cooper; Alex J Sutton; Miranda Mugford; Keith R Abrams
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2003 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Missing... presumed at random: cost-analysis of incomplete data.

Authors:  Andrew Briggs; Taane Clark; Jane Wolstenholme; Philip Clarke
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.046

10.  Estimation of patient preference-based utility weights from the functional assessment of cancer therapy - general.

Authors:  Deborah Dobrez; David Cella; A Simon Pickard; Jin-Shei Lai; Angel Nickolov
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2007 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.725

  10 in total
  8 in total

1.  Mapping clinical outcomes to generic preference-based outcome measures: development and comparison of methods.

Authors:  Mónica Hernández Alava; Allan Wailoo; Stephen Pudney; Laura Gray; Andrea Manca
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 4.014

2.  Mapping Quality of Life (EQ-5D) from DAPsA, Clinical DAPsA and HAQ in Psoriatic Arthritis.

Authors:  Tomas Mlcoch; Jan Tuzil; Liliana Sedova; Jiri Stolfa; Monika Urbanova; David Suchy; Andrea Smrzova; Jitka Jircikova; Tereza Hrnciarova; Karel Pavelka; Tomas Dolezal
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Protocol for the economic evaluation of the diarrhea alleviation through zinc and oral rehydration salt therapy at scale through private and public providers in rural Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh, India.

Authors:  Samuel D Shillcutt; Amnesty E LeFevre; Christa L Fischer Walker; Robert E Black; Sarmila Mazumder
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2014-11-19       Impact factor: 7.327

4.  How Uncertain is the Survival Extrapolation? A Study of the Impact of Different Parametric Survival Models on Extrapolated Uncertainty About Hazard Functions, Lifetime Mean Survival and Cost Effectiveness.

Authors:  Ben Kearns; John Stevens; Shijie Ren; Alan Brennan
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  An examination of machine learning to map non-preference based patient reported outcome measures to health state utility values.

Authors:  Mona Aghdaee; Bonny Parkinson; Kompal Sinha; Yuanyuan Gu; Rajan Sharma; Emma Olin; Henry Cutler
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 2.395

6.  Development of Methods for the Mapping of Utilities Using Mixture Models: Mapping the AQLQ-S to the EQ-5D-5L and the HUI3 in Patients with Asthma.

Authors:  Laura A Gray; Mónica Hernández Alava; Allan J Wailoo
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 5.725

7.  Mapping of the Gastrointestinal Short Form Questionnaire (GSF-Q) into EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Authors:  Manuel Monroy; Miguel A Ruiz; Javier Rejas; Javier Soto
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2018-09-10       Impact factor: 3.186

8.  Mapping to Quality of Life and Capability Measures in Cataract Surgery Patients: From Cat-PROM5 to EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and ICECAP-O Using Mixture Modelling.

Authors:  Padraig Dixon; William Hollingworth; John Sparrow
Journal:  MDM Policy Pract       Date:  2020-04-06
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.