Literature DB >> 24605979

Cost-effectiveness analysis: a proposal of new reporting standards in statistical analysis.

Heejung Bang1, Hongwei Zhao.   

Abstract

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a method for evaluating the outcomes and costs of competing strategies designed to improve health, and has been applied to a variety of different scientific fields. Yet there are inherent complexities in cost estimation and CEA from statistical perspectives (e.g., skewness, bidimensionality, and censoring). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio that represents the additional cost per unit of outcome gained by a new strategy has served as the most widely accepted methodology in the CEA. In this article, we call for expanded perspectives and reporting standards reflecting a more comprehensive analysis that can elucidate different aspects of available data. Specifically, we propose that mean- and median-based incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and average cost-effectiveness ratios be reported together, along with relevant summary and inferential statistics, as complementary measures for informed decision making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24605979      PMCID: PMC3955019          DOI: 10.1080/10543406.2013.860157

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biopharm Stat        ISSN: 1054-3406            Impact factor:   1.051


  58 in total

Review 1.  Cost and cost-effectiveness guidelines: which ones to use?

Authors:  D Walker
Journal:  Health Policy Plan       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.344

2.  Why don't Americans use cost-effectiveness analysis?

Authors:  Peter J Neumann
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.229

3.  The CE plane: a graphic representation of cost-effectiveness.

Authors:  W C Black
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1990 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 4.  Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: the ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force report.

Authors:  Scott Ramsey; Richard Willke; Andrew Briggs; Ruth Brown; Martin Buxton; Anita Chawla; John Cook; Henry Glick; Bengt Liljas; Diana Petitti; Shelby Reed
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.725

5.  What does the value of modern medicine say about the $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year decision rule?

Authors:  R Scott Braithwaite; David O Meltzer; Joseph T King; Douglas Leslie; Mark S Roberts
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 6.  Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine.

Authors:  M C Weinstein; J E Siegel; M R Gold; M S Kamlet; L B Russell
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1996-10-16       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Estimating mean total costs in the presence of censoring: a comparative assessment of methods.

Authors:  Tracey A Young
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Characteristics of recent biostatistical methods adopted by researchers publishing in general/internal medicine journals.

Authors:  Paul J Nietert; Amy E Wahlquist; Teri Lynn Herbert
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-03-13       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Assessing the impact of censoring of costs and effects on health-care decision-making: an example using the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study.

Authors:  Elisabeth Fenwick; Deborah A Marshall; Gordon Blackhouse; Humberto Vidaillet; April Slee; Lynn Shemanski; Adrian R Levy
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2007-09-13       Impact factor: 5.725

10.  The cost effectiveness of antiretroviral treatment strategies in resource-limited settings.

Authors:  David Bishai; Arantxa Colchero; David T Durack
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  2007-06-19       Impact factor: 4.177

View more
  10 in total

1.  Differential Prescribing of Antimuscarinic Agents in Older Adults with Cognitive Impairment.

Authors:  Scott Martin Vouri; Mario Schootman; Seth A Strope; Stanley J Birge; Margaret A Olsen
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 3.923

2.  Median-based incremental cost-effectiveness ratios with censored data.

Authors:  Heejung Bang; Hongwei Zhao
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2015-05-26       Impact factor: 1.051

3.  Nonparametric inference for time-dependent incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

Authors:  Laura M Yee; Kwun Chuen Gary Chan
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-07-27       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Cost-effectiveness of a Dengue Vector Control Intervention in Colombia.

Authors:  Alejandra Taborda; Cindy Chamorro; Juliana Quintero; Gabriel Carrasquilla; Darío Londoño
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2022-04-18       Impact factor: 3.707

5.  Exploring the potential cost-effectiveness of a vocational rehabilitation program for individuals with schizophrenia in a high-income welfare society.

Authors:  Stig Evensen; Torbjørn Wisløff; June Ullevoldsæter Lystad; Helen Bull; Egil W Martinsen; Torill Ueland; Erik Falkum
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 3.630

6.  Implementation costs of a community health worker delivered weight loss intervention in black churches serving underserved communities.

Authors:  Karen H Kim Yeary; Cameron M Kaplan; Ellen Hutchins
Journal:  Prev Med Rep       Date:  2020-04-01

7.  Financial burden of postoperative complications following colonic resection: A systematic review.

Authors:  Maleck Louis; Samuel A Johnston; Leonid Churilov; Ronald Ma; Christopher Christophi; Laurence Weinberg
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-07-09       Impact factor: 1.817

8.  Economic burden and mental health of primary caregivers of perinatally HIV infected adolescents from Kilifi, Kenya.

Authors:  Patrick V Katana; Amina Abubakar; Moses K Nyongesa; Derrick Ssewanyana; Paul Mwangi; Charles R Newton; Julie Jemutai
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2020-04-16       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  Effectiveness of music therapy for alleviating pain during haemodialysis access cannulation for patients undergoing haemodialysis: a multi-facility, single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Masatsugu Kishida; Yosuke Yamada; Emi Inayama; Mineaki Kitamura; Tomoya Nishino; Keiko Ota; Ayumi Shintani; Tatsuyoshi Ikenoue
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  The cost-effectiveness of pegaspargase versus native asparaginase for first-line treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: a UK-based cost-utility analysis.

Authors:  Xingdi Hu; Kingsley P Wildman; Subham Basu; Peggy L Lin; Clare Rowntree; Vaskar Saha
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2019-12-29
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.