Comparing multiple competing interventions in the absence of randomized trials using clinical risk-benefit analysis

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 12, Issue , 2012, Pages

  Lazo Langner, Alejandro ^a   Rodger, Marc A ^b,c   Barrowman, Nicholas J ^d   Ramsay, Tim ^b,c   Wells, Philip S ^b,c   Coyle, Douglas A ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^c OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^d CHILDREN S HOSPITAL OF EASTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Decision Making; indirect comparison; Meta Analysis; Methods; Monte Carlo Method; Risk; Risk Benefit Analysis

Indexed keywords

ANTICOAGULANT AGENT; LOW MOLECULAR WEIGHT HEPARIN; PLACEBO;

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMICS; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HUMAN; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); METHODOLOGY; MONTE CARLO METHOD; ORTHOPEDICS; PARTIAL THROMBOPLASTIN TIME; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM;

ANTICOAGULANTS; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; BAYES THEOREM; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; HEPARIN, LOW-MOLECULAR-WEIGHT; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MONTE CARLO METHOD; ORTHOPEDICS; PARTIAL THROMBOPLASTIN TIME; PLACEBOS; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM;

EID: 84855491633     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-3     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Clinical decision making: from theory to practice. Anatomy of a decision. Eddy DM, JAMA 1990 263 441 443 10.1001/jama.1990.03440030128037 2294311
2. Advances in risk-benefit evaluation using probabilistic simulation methods: an application to the prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis. Lynd LD, O'Brien BJ, J Clin Epidemiol 2004 57 795 803 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.12.012 15485731 (Pubitemid 39370162)
3. Benefit-risk analysis: a proposal using quantitative methods. Holden WL, Juhaeri J, Dai W, Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003 12 611 616 10.1002/pds.887 14558185 (Pubitemid 37220648)
4. Calculating confidence intervals for the number needed to treat. Bender R, Control Clin Trials 2001 22 102 110 10.1016/S0197-2456(00)00134-3 11306148 (Pubitemid 32289446)
5. A note on the number needed to treat. Lesaffre E, Pledger G, Control Clin Trials 1999 20 439 447 10.1016/S0197-2456(99)00018-5 10503803 (Pubitemid 29460920)
6. Benefit-risk analysis: examples using quantitative methods. Holden WL, Juhaeri J, Dai W, Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003 12 693 697 10.1002/pds.794 14762986 (Pubitemid 38028784)
7. Improving interpretation of clinical studies by use of confidence levels, clinical significance curves, and risk-benefit contours. Shakespeare TP, Gebski VJ, Veness MJ, Simes J, Lancet 2001 357 1349 1353 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04522-0 11343760 (Pubitemid 32441538)
8. Benefit-risk ratios in the assessment of the clinical evidence of a new therapy. Willan AR, O'Brien BJ, Cook DJ, Control Clin Trials 1997 18 121 130 10.1016/S0197-2456(96)00092-X 9129856 (Pubitemid 27225889)
9. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Stinnett AA, Mullahy J, Med Decis Making 1998 18 68 S80 10.1177/0272989X9801800209 9566468 (Pubitemid 28175944)
10. Constructing confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios: an evaluation of parametric and non-parametric techniques using Monte Carlo simulation. Briggs AH, Mooney CZ, Wonderling DE, Stat Med 1999 18 3245 3262 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19991215)18:23<3245::AID-SIM314>3.0.CO;2-2 10602149
11. Joint distribution approaches to simultaneously quantifying benefit and risk. Shaffer M, Watterberg K, BMC Med Res Methodol 2006 6 48 10.1186/1471-2288-6-48 17038184 (Pubitemid 44689981)
12. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD, J Clin Epidemiol 1997 50 683 691 10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00049-8 9250266 (Pubitemid 27341818)
13. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses. Song F, Altman DG, Glenny AM, Deeks JJ, Br Med J 2003 326 472 10.1136/bmj.326.7387.472
14. Modelling in health economic evaluation. What is its place? What is its value? Brennan A, Akehurst R, Pharmacoeconomics 2000 17 445 459 10.2165/00019053-200017050-00004 10977387 (Pubitemid 30398804)
15. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation. A practical approach. Doubilet P, Begg CB, Weinstein MC, Braun P, McNeil BJ, Med Decis Making 1985 5 157 177 10.1177/0272989X8500500205 3831638 (Pubitemid 16130640)
16. Collection and analysis of data. Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW, Methods for the economic evaluation of health programmes Oxford UK: Oxford University Press, Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW, 1997 232 264
17. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL, Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press 3 2005
18. The CE plane: a graphic representation of cost-effectiveness. Black WC, Med Decis Making 1990 10 212 214 10.1177/0272989X9001000308 2115096 (Pubitemid 20311440)
19. Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models. Briggs AH, Pharmacoeconomics 2000 17 479 500 10.2165/00019053-200017050-00006 10977389 (Pubitemid 30398806)
20. Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). Geerts WH, Bergqvist D, Pineo GF, Heit JA, Samama CM, Lassen MR, et al. Chest 2008 133 381S 453 10.1378/chest.08-0656 18574271 (Pubitemid 351894916)
21. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF, Lancet 1999 354 1896 1900 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04149-5 10584742
22. Clinical outcomes in patients receiving venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis after orthopedic surgery (OS). A systematic review and meta analysis of proportions. Lazo-Langner A, Coyle D, Barrowman NJ, Ramsay T, Wells PS, Scarvelis D, et al. Blood 2006 108 bstract 626
23. Low-molecular-weight heparin in the treatment of patients with venous thromboembolism. The Columbus Investigators, N Engl J Med 1997 337 657 662 9280815
24. Definition of major bleeding in clinical investigations of antihemostatic medicinal products in non-surgical patients. Schulman S, Kearon C, J Thromb Haemost 2005 3 692 694 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2005.01204.x 15842354 (Pubitemid 41647882)
25. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Control Clin Trials 1996 17 1 12 10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134- 4 8721797 (Pubitemid 26120810)
26. Allocation concealment in randomised trials: defending against deciphering. Schulz KF, Grimes DA, Lancet 2002 359 614 618 10.1016/S0140- 6736(02)07750-4 11867132 (Pubitemid 34178448)
27. Some Results Concerning the Estimation of Beta Distribution Parameters in PERT. Farnum NR, Stanton LW, J Oper Res Soc 1987 38 287 290
28. Using propensity scores to estimate the cost-effectiveness of medical therapies. Indurkhya A, Mitra N, Schrag D, Stat Med 2006 25 1561 1576 10.1002/sim.2267 16158412
29. A Markov computer simulation model of the economics of neuromuscular blockade in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Macario A, Chow JL, Dexter F, BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2006 6 15 10.1186/1472-6947-6-15 16539706
30. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendation for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Moher D, Schultz KF, Altman DG, Lancet 2001 357 1191 1194 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04337-3 11323066 (Pubitemid 32378696)
31. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S, Control Clin Trials 1995 16 62 73 10.1016/0197-2456(94) 00031-W 7743790
32. Long-term renal prognosis of diarrhea-associated hemolytic uremic syndrome: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Garg AX, Suri RS, Barrowman N, Rehman F, Matsell D, Rosas-Arellano MP, et al. JAMA 2003 290 1360 1370 10.1001/jama.290.10.1360 12966129 (Pubitemid 37442634)
33. Some statistical methods for combining experimental results. Laird NM, Mosteller F, Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1990 6 5 30 10.1017/ S0266462300008916 2361819 (Pubitemid 20287159)
34. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves-caveats quantified. Jakubczyk M, Kaminski B, Health Econ 2010 19 955 963 19688780
35. Optimal healthcare decisions: Comparing medical treatments on a cost-effectiveness basis. Moreno E, Giron FJ, Vazquez-Polo FJ, Negrin MA, European Journal of Operational Research 2010 204 180 187 10.1016/j.ejor.2009. 10.012
36. Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods. Newcombe RG, Stat Med 1998 17 857 872 10.1002/(SICI)1097- 0258(19980430)17:8<857::AID-SIM777>3.0.CO;2-E 9595616 (Pubitemid 28185165)