How big does the effect of an intervention have to be? Application of two novel methods to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of a fall prevention programme: A study protocol

BMJ Open

Volumn 3, Issue 2, 2013, Pages

  Franco, Marcia Rodrigues ^a   Ferreira, Manuela L ^a   Howard, Kirsten ^b   Sherrington, Catherine ^a   Rose, John ^c   Haines, Terry P ^d   Ferreira, Paulo ^e  

^a GEORGE INSTITUTE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^d MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^e UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COST; DECISION MAKING; EXERCISE; FALL RISK; FALL RISK ASSESSMENT; FALLING; HUMAN; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

EID: 84874961124     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002355     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 2010;152:726-32.
2. Ferreira ML, Herbert RD, Crowther MJ, et al. When is a further clinical trial justified? BMJ 2012;345:e5913.
3. Barrett B, Brown R, Mundt M, et al. Using benefit harm trade-offs to estimate sufficiently important difference: the case of the common cold. Med Decis Making 2005;25:47-55. (Pubitemid 40139883)
4. Ferreira ML, Herbert RD, Ferreira PH, et al. A critical review of methods used to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of interventions for low back pain. J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65:253-61.
5. Gillespie LD, Robertson MC, Gillespie WJ, et al. Interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;9:CD007146.
6. Sherrington C, Tiedemann A, Fairhall N, et al. Exercise to prevent falls in older adults: an updated meta-analysis and best practice recommendations. NSW Public Health Bull 2011;22:78-83.
7. Bridges JF, Hauber AB, Marshall D, et al. Conjoint analysis applications in health - a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health 2011;14:403-13.
8. Bliemer MCJ, Rose JM, Hensher DA. Efficient stated choices experiments for estimating nested logit models. Transportation Res Part B 2009;43:19-35.
9. Henscher DA, Greene WH. Applied choice analysis: a primer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
10. Efron B, Tibshirani R. An introduction to the Bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall, 1993.
11. Barrett B, Harahan B, Brown D, et al. Sufficiently important difference for common cold: severity reduction. Ann Fam Med 2007;5:216-23. (Pubitemid 46889998)
12. Ortuzar J, Willumsen L. Modelling transport. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc, 2001.
13. Revelt D, Train K. Mixed logit with repeated choices: households' choice of appliance efficiency level. Rev Econ Stat 1998;80:647-57. (Pubitemid 128344306)
14. Train K. Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
15. Hensher DA, Greene WH, Rose JM. Applied choice analysis: a primer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
16. Howard K, Salkeld G. Does attribute framing in discrete choice experiments influence willingness to pay? Results from a discrete choice experiment in screening for colorectal cancer. Value Health 2008;12:354-63.
17. Lancsar E, Louviere J. Deleting 'irrational' responses from discrete choice experiments: a case of investigating or imposing preferences? Health Econ 2006;15:797-811. (Pubitemid 44184131)