Common methodological flaws in economic evaluations

Medical Care

Volumn 43, Issue 7 SUPPL., 2005, Pages

  Drummond, Michael ^a   Sculpher, Mark ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness analysis; Decision makers; Health technology assessment; Reimbursement

Indexed keywords

EID: 22944436125     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000170001.10393.b7     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. Commonwealth Department of Human Services and Health. Guidelines for the Pharmaceutical Industry on Preparation of Submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee including Major Submissions Involving Economic Analysis. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Services; 1995.
2. Ontario Ministry of Health. Guidelines for Economic Analysis of Pharmaceutical Products. Toronto: Ministry of Health; 1994.
3. National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: NICE; April 2004.
4. Drummond MF. The Relevance of Health Economic Evaluation to Health Care Decision Makers. Spectrum Report. Waltham, MA: Decision Resources Inc; 2002.
5. Gerard K, Smoker L, Seymour J. Raising the quality of cost-utility analyses: lessons learnt and still to learn. Health Policy. 1999;46:219-238.
6. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.
7. Jefferson T, Demicheli V. Quality of economic evaluations in healthcare: is it time for action to ensure higher methodological quality? BMJ. 2002;324:313-314.
8. Jefferson T, Demicheli V, Vale L. Quality of systematic reviews of economic evaluations in health care. JAMA. 2002;287:2809-2812.
9. Neumann PJ, Stone PW, Chapman RH, et al. The quality of reporting in published cost-utility analyses, 1976-1997. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:964-972.
10. Phillips KA, Chen JL. Impact of the US panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Am J Prev Med. 2002;22:98-105.
11. Kassirer JP, Angell M. The journal's policy on cost-effectiveness analysis. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:669-670.
12. Hillman AL, Eisenberg JM, Pauly MV, et al. Avoiding bias in the conduct of cost-effectiveness research sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:1362-1365.
13. Friedberg M, Saffron B, Stinson TJ, et al. Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analyses of new drugs used in oncology. JAMA. 1999;282:1453-1457.
14. Hill SR, Mitchell AS, Henry DA. Problems with the interpretation of pharmacoeconomic analysis: a review of submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. JAMA. 2000;283:2116-2121.
15. Sheldon TA. Problems of using modelling in the economic evaluation of health care. Health Econ. 1996;5:1-11.
16. Claxton K, Sculpher M, Drummond MF. A rational framework for decision making by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Lancet. 2002;360:711-715.
17. Mark DB, Hlatky MA, Califf RM, et al. Cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy with tissue plasminogen activator as compared with streptokinase for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1995;332:1418-1424.
18. Johannesson M, O'Conor RM. Cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective. Health Policy. 1997;39:241-253.
19. Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment (CCOHTA). Guidelines for Economic Evaluation of Pharmaceuticals. Ottawa: CCOHTA; 1994.
20. O'Brien BJ, Anderson DR, Goeree R. Cost-effectiveness of enoxaparin versus warfarin prophylaxis against deep-vein thrombosis after total hip replacement. Can Med Assoc J. 1994;15:1083-1090.
21. Palmer S, Sculpher M, Philips Z, et al. A cost-effectiveness model comparing alternative management strategies for the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists in non-st-elevation acute coronary syndrome. Report to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/Docref. asp?d=32030. 2002.
22. Song F, Altman DG, Glenny A-M, et al. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;326:472.
23. Wilby J, Kainth A, Hawkins N, et al. A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness, tolerability and cost effectiveness of newer drugs for epilepsy in adults. Technology Assessment report commissioned by the HTA programme on behalf of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. In press.
24. Ades AE. A chain of evidence with mixed comparisons: models for multi-parameter evidence synthesis and consistency of evidence. Stat Med. 2003;22:2995-3016.
25. Jönsson B, Bebbington P. Economic studies of the treatment of depressive illness. In: Jonsson B, Rosenbaum J, eds. Health Economics of Depression: Perspectives in Psychiatry, vol 4. Chichester: Wiley; 1993:1-13.
26. Dunbar GC, Cohn JB, Fabre LF, et al. A comparison of paroxetine, imipramine and placebo in depressed patients. Br J Psychiatry. 1991;159:394-398.
27. Freemantle N, Maynard A. Something rotten in the state of clinical and economic evaluations? Health Econ. 1994;3:63-67.
28. Jönsson B. Economic evaluation and clinical uncertainty: response to Freemantle and Maynard. Health Econ. 1994;3:305-307.
29. Oster G, Epstein A. Cost-effectiveness of anti-hyperlipidemic therapy in the prevention of coronary heart disease: the case of cholestyramine. JAMA. 1987;258:2381-2387.
30. 29a. Chancellor JV, Hill AM, Sabin CA, et al. Modelling the cost effectiveness of lamivudine/zidovudine combination therapy in HIV infection. PharmacoEconomics. 1997;12:1-13.
31. Schulman KA, Lynn LA, Glick HA, et al. Cost effectiveness of low-dose zidovudine therapy for asymptomatic patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Ann Intern Med. 1991:798-802.
32. Sharma S, Brown GC, Brown M, et al. The cost-effectiveness of photodynamic therapy for fellow eyes with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:2051-2059.
33. O'Brien BJ, Goeree R, Hux M, et al. Economic evaluation of donepezil for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease in Canada. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1999;47:570-578.
34. Neumann PJ, Hermann RC, Kuntz KM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of donepezil in the treatment of mild or moderate Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. 1999;52:1138-1145.
35. Kendrick M, Johnson KI. Long-term treatment of multiple sclerosis with interferon-beta may be cost-effective. Pharmacoeconomics. 2000;18:45-53.
36. Chilcott J, McCabe C, Tappenden P, et al. Modelling the cost effectiveness of interferon beta and glatiramer acete in the management of multiple sclerosis. BMJ. 2003;326:522.
37. Caro J, Klittich W, McGuire A, et al. The West of Scotland coronary prevention study: economic benefit analysis of primary prevention with pravastatin. BMJ. 1997;315:1577-1582.
38. Kristiansen IS, Eggen AE, Thelle DS. Cost-effectiveness of incremental programmes for lowering serum cholesterol concentration: is individual intervention worthwhile? BMJ. 1991;302:1119-1122.
39. Briggs A, Sculpher M. Sensitivity analysis in economic evaluation: a review of published studies. Health Econ. 1995;4:355-371.
40. Claxton K, Sculpher M, McCabe C, et al. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for NICE technology assessment: not an optional extra. Health Econ. 2005;14:339-347.
41. Briggs A. Handling uncertainty in economic evaluation and presenting the results. In: Drummond MF, McGuire A, eds. Economic Evaluation in Health Care: Merging Theory With Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001:172-214.
42. Weinstein MC, O'Brien BJ, Hornberger J, et al. Principles of good practice for decision analytic modelling in health-care evaluation: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices - modelling studies. Value in Health. 2003;6:9-17.
43. Drummond MF, Jefferson TO, for the BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. Guidelines to authors and peer-reviewers of economic submissions to the British Medical Journal. 1996;313:275-283.
44. Drummond MF, Brown R, Fendrick AM, et al. Use of pharmacoeconomics information - report of the ISPOR task force on use of pharmacoeconomic/health economic information in health care decision-making. Value in Health. 2003;6:407-416.
45. Glick HA, Polsky DP, Schulman KA. Trial-based economic evaluations: an overview of design and analysis. In: Drummond MF, McGuire A, eds. Economic Evaluation in Health Care: Merging Theory With Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 113-140.
46. Sculpher MJ, Pang FS, Manca A, et al. Generalisability in economic evaluation studies in health care: a review and case studies. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8:1-206.