Critical appraisal of costeffectiveness and cost-utility studies in health care

Evidence-Based Nursing

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 99-102

  Soares, Marta ^a   Dumville, Jo C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; STANDARD; UNITED KINGDOM;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; RESEARCH DESIGN; TECHNOLOGY, MEDICAL;

EID: 52649157750     PISSN: 13676539     EISSN: 14689618     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/ebn.11.4.99     Document Type: Note

References (39)

1. Soares M, Dumville JC. Economic evaluation of healthcare technologies using primary research. Evid Based Nurs 2008;11:67-71.
2. Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
3. National Institute for Clinical and Health Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. April 2004. http://www.nice.org.uk/niceMedia/pdf/TAP_Methods.pdf (accessed 8 Aug 2008).
4. Philips Z, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, et al. Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. Health Technol Assess 2004;8:iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-158.
5. Ramsey S, Willke R, Briggs A, et al. Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: the ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force report. Value Health 2005;8:521-33.
6. Gillies CL, Lambert PC, Abrams KR, et al. Different strategies for screening and prevention of type 2 diabetes in adults: cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ 2008;336:1180-5.
7. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guidance for manufacturers and sponsors. June 2001. http://www.nice.org.uk/niceMedia/pdf/technicalguidanceformanufacturersandsponsors.pdf (accessed 8 Aug 2008).
8. Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Drummond M, et al. Whither trial-based economic evaluation for health care decision making? Health Econ 2006;15:677-87.
9. Siebert U. When should decision-analytic modeling be used in the economic evaluation of health care? Euro J Health Econ 2003;4:143-50.
10. Akobundu E, Ju J, Blatt L, et al. Cost-of-illness studies: a review of current methods. Pharmacoeconomics 2006;24:869-90.
11. Manca A, Dumville JC, Torgerson DJ, et al. Randomized trial of two physiotherapy interventions for primary care back and neck pain patients: cost effectiveness analysis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2007;46:1495-501.
12. Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR, et al. Systematic reviews of trials and other studies. Health Technol Assess 1998;2:1-276.
13. Glenny AM, Altman DG, Song F, et al, for the International Stroke Trial Collaborative Group. Indirect comparisons of competing interventions. Health Technol Assess 2005;9:1-134. iii-iv.
14. Nixon RM, Bansback N, Brennan A. Using mixed treatment comparisons and metaregression to perform indirect comparisons to estimate the efficacy of biologic treatments in rheumatoid arthritis. Stat Med 2007;26:1237-54.
15. Manning R, Claxton K. Experimental and econometric solutions to selection bias. Paper presented at the Health Economists Study Group. University of York, 1997.
16. Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. British National Formulary. London: Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, 2006.
17. Department of Health. NHS reference costs 2004. London: Department of Health, 2005.
18. Curtis L, Netten A. Unit costs of health and social care. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent, 2006.
19. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al, editors. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
20. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al, for the GRADE working group. Incorporating considerations of resources use into grading recommendations. BMJ 2008;336:1170-3.
21. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, et al. A social tariff for EuroQol: results from a UK general population survey. University of York Centre for Health Economics Discussion Paper Series No. 138. York: Centre for Health Economics, 1995.
22. Torgerson DJ, Raftery J. Economic notes. Discounting. BMJ 1999;319:914-5.
23. Weinstein MC, Stason WB. Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N Engl J Med 1977;296:716-21.
24. Burton A, Billingham LJ, Bryan S. Cost-effectiveness in clinical trials: using multiple imputation to deal with incomplete cost data. Clin Trials 2007;4:154-61.
25. Lin DY. Linear regression analysis of censored medical costs. Biostatistics 2000;1:35-47.
26. Willan AR, Lin DY, Manca A. Regression methods for cost-effectiveness analysis with censored data. Stat Med 2005;24:131-45.
27. Nixon RM, Thompson SG. Methods for incorporating covariate adjustment, subgroup analysis and between-centre differences into cost-effectiveness evaluations. Health Econ 2005;14:1217-29.
28. Manca A, Willan AR. 'Lost in translation': accounting for between-country differences in the analysis of multinational cost-effectiveness data. Pharmacoeconomics 2006;24:1101-19.
29. Claxton K, Cohen JT, Neumann PJ. When is evidence sufficient? Health Aff (Millwood) 2005;24:93-101.
30. Griffin S, Claxton K, Hawkins N, et al. Probabilistic analysis and computationally expensive models: necessary and required? Value Health 2006;9:244-52.
31. Sonnenberg FA, Beck JR. Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide. Med Decis Making 1993;13:322-38.
32. Brennan A, Chick SE, Davies R. A taxonomy of model structures for economic evaluation of health technologies. Health Econ 2006;15:1295-310.
33. Willan AR, Briggs AH, Hoch JS. Regression methods for covariate adjustment and subgroup analysis for non-censored cost-effectiveness data. Health Econ 2004;13:461-75.
34. Stevenson M, Jones ML, De Nigris E, et al. A systematic review and economic evaluation of alendronate, etidronate, risedronate, raloxifene and teriparatide for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Health Technol Assess 2005;9:1-160.
35. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of technologies for the secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women. Technology Appraisal (ref TA87). London, 2005. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=byID&o=11550 (accessed 8 Aug 2008).
36. Stinnett AA, Paltiel AD. Estimating CE ratios under second-order uncertainty: the mean ratio versus the ratio of means. Med Decis Making 1997;17:483-9.
37. Briggs AH, O'Brien BJ, Blackhouse G. Thinking outside the box: recent advances in the analysis and presentation of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness studies. Annu Rev Public Health 2002;23:377-401.
38. Fenwick E, O'Brien BJ, Briggs A. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves-facts, fallacies and frequently asked questions. Health Econ 2004;13:405-15.
39. Iglesias C, Nelson EA, Cullum NA, et al, for the VenUS Team, VenUS I: a randomised controlled trial of two types of bandage for treating venous leg ulcers. Health Technol Assess 2004;8:iii, 1-105.