Literature DB >> 9683093

Sample size calculation in economic evaluations.

M J Al1, B A van Hout, B C Michel, F F Rutten.   

Abstract

A simulation method is presented for sample size calculation in economic evaluations. As input the method requires: the expected difference and variance of costs and effects, their correlation, the significance level (alpha) and the power of the testing method and the maximum acceptable ratio of incremental effectiveness to incremental costs. The method is illustrated with data from two trials. The first compares primary coronary angioplasty with streptokinase in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction, in the second trial, lansoprazole is compared with omeprazole in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis. These case studies show how the various parameters influence the sample size. Given the large number of parameters that have to be specified in advance, the lack of knowledge about costs and their standard deviation, and the difficulty of specifying the maximum acceptable ratio of incremental effectiveness to incremental costs, the conclusion of the study is that from a technical point of view it is possible to perform a sample size calculation for an economic evaluation, but one should wonder how useful it is.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9683093     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1050(199806)7:4<327::aid-hec342>3.0.co;2-u

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ        ISSN: 1057-9230            Impact factor:   3.046


  12 in total

1.  Use of randomised controlled trials for producing cost-effectiveness evidence: potential impact of design choices on sample size and study duration.

Authors:  Martin E Backhouse
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Estimation, power and sample size calculations for stochastic cost and effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  S D Walter; Amiram Gafni; Stephen Birch
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Sample size and power for cost-effectiveness analysis (part 1).

Authors:  Henry A Glick
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Cost effectiveness of continuous terbinafine compared with intermittent itraconazole in the treatment of dermatophyte toenail onychomycosis: an analysis of based on results from the L.I.ON. study. Lamisil versus Itraconazole in Onychomycosis.

Authors:  R Jansen; W K Redekop; F F Rutten
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Esomeprazole tablet vs omeprazole capsule in treating erosive esophagitis.

Authors:  Chih-Yen Chen; Ching-Liang Lu; Jiing-Chyuan Luo; Full-Young Chang; Shou-Dong Lee; Yung-Ling Lai
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-05-28       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Cost effectiveness of interventions for lateral epicondylitis: results from a randomised controlled trial in primary care.

Authors:  Ingeborg B C Korthals-de Bos; Nynke Smidt; Maurits W van Tulder; Maureen P M H Rutten-van Mölken; Herman J Adèr; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Willem J J Assendelft; Lex M Bouter
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Cost effectiveness and cost utility of acetylcysteine versus dimethyl sulfoxide for reflex sympathetic dystrophy.

Authors:  Hiske E M van Dieten; Roberto S G M Perez; Maurits W van Tulder; Jaap J de Lange; Wouter W A Zuurmond; Herman J Ader; Hindrik Vondeling; Maarten Boers
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Protocol for north of England and Scotland study of tonsillectomy and adeno-tonsillectomy in children (NESSTAC). A pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing surgical intervention with conventional medical treatment in children with recurrent sore throats.

Authors:  John Bond; Janet Wilson; Martin Eccles; Alessandra Vanoli; Nick Steen; Ray Clarke; Andrew Zarod; Catherine Lock; Katie Brittain; Chris Speed; Nikki Rousseau
Journal:  BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord       Date:  2006-08-09

9.  Cost-effectiveness of active monitoring versus antidepressants for major depression in primary health care: a 12-month non-randomized controlled trial (INFAP study).

Authors:  Maria Rubio-Valera; Imma Beneitez; María Teresa Peñarrubia-María; Juan V Luciano; Juan M Mendive; Paul McCrone; Martin Knapp; Ramon Sabés-Figuera; Katarzyna Kocyan; Javier García-Campayo; Antoni Serrano-Blanco
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 3.630

10.  Low back pain in general practice: cost-effectiveness of a minimal psychosocial intervention versus usual care.

Authors:  Petra Jellema; Nicole van der Roer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Maurits W van Tulder; Henriëtte E van der Horst; Wim A B Stalman; Lex M Bouter
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-07-21       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.