A scoping review of statistical methods for trial-based economic evaluations: The current state of play.

Mohamed El Alili, Johanna M van Dongen, Jonas L Esser, Martijn W Heymans, Maurits W van Tulder, Judith E Bosmans
Author Information
  1. Mohamed El Alili: Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. ORCID
  2. Johanna M van Dongen: Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  3. Jonas L Esser: Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  4. Martijn W Heymans: Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  5. Maurits W van Tulder: Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  6. Judith E Bosmans: Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Abstract

The statistical quality of trial-based economic evaluations is often suboptimal, while a comprehensive overview of available statistical methods is lacking. Therefore, this review summarized and critically appraised available statistical methods for trial-based economic evaluations. A literature search was performed to identify studies on statistical methods for dealing with baseline imbalances, skewed costs and/or effects, correlated costs and effects, clustered data, longitudinal data, missing data and censoring in trial-based economic evaluations. Data was extracted on the statistical methods described, their advantages, disadvantages, relative performance and recommendations of the study. Sixty-eight studies were included. Of them, 27 (40%) assessed methods for baseline imbalances, 39 (57%) assessed methods for skewed costs and/or effects, 27 (40%) assessed methods for correlated costs and effects, 18 (26%) assessed methods for clustered data, 7 (10%) assessed methods for longitudinal data, 26 (38%) assessed methods for missing data and 10 (15%) assessed methods for censoring. All identified methods were narratively described. This review provides a comprehensive overview of available statistical methods for dealing with the most common statistical complexities in trial-based economic evaluations. Herewith, it can provide valuable input for researchers when deciding which statistical methods to use in a trial-based economic evaluation.

Keywords

References

  1. Med Decis Making. 2010 Mar-Apr;30(2):163-75 [PMID: 19675321]
  2. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2004 Oct;9(4):197-204 [PMID: 15509405]
  3. Qual Life Res. 2015 Apr;24(4):805-15 [PMID: 25471286]
  4. Health Econ. 2018 Jun;27(6):1024-1040 [PMID: 29573044]
  5. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 May 19;21(1):475 [PMID: 34011337]
  6. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(12):1229-42 [PMID: 16336017]
  7. Biostatistics. 2000 Mar;1(1):35-47 [PMID: 12933524]
  8. Health Econ. 2022 Dec;31(12):2680-2699 [PMID: 36089775]
  9. Value Health. 2015 Mar;18(2):161-72 [PMID: 25773551]
  10. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005 Apr;10(2):97-102 [PMID: 15831192]
  11. Stat Methods Med Res. 2002 Dec;11(6):469-90 [PMID: 12516985]
  12. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015 Jan 24;12:4 [PMID: 25616598]
  13. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Sep;66(9):1022-8 [PMID: 23790725]
  14. Health Econ. 2008 Jan;17(1):67-81 [PMID: 17533622]
  15. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015 Oct;33(10):1083-90 [PMID: 25957531]
  16. Health Econ. 2009 Jul;18(7):807-21 [PMID: 18792078]
  17. Health Econ. 2003 Jan;12(1):33-49 [PMID: 12483759]
  18. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Oct;35(10):1007-1033 [PMID: 28674846]
  19. Med Decis Making. 2005 Jul-Aug;25(4):416-23 [PMID: 16061893]
  20. Med Decis Making. 2013 Nov;33(8):1051-63 [PMID: 23913915]
  21. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2020 Feb;20(1):27-37 [PMID: 31731882]
  22. Stat Med. 2011 Feb 20;30(4):377-99 [PMID: 21225900]
  23. Med Decis Making. 2012 Jan-Feb;32(1):209-20 [PMID: 21610256]
  24. Pharmacoeconomics. 2003;21(15):1103-12 [PMID: 14596629]
  25. Health Econ. 2006 Jul;15(7):677-87 [PMID: 16491461]
  26. Med Decis Making. 1990 Jul-Sep;10(3):212-4 [PMID: 2115096]
  27. J Med Libr Assoc. 2019 Apr;107(2):210-221 [PMID: 31019390]
  28. Stat Med. 2019 Jan 30;38(2):210-220 [PMID: 30207407]
  29. BMJ. 2000 Apr 29;320(7243):1197-200 [PMID: 10784550]
  30. Stat Med. 2007 Jul 30;26(17):3274-99 [PMID: 17309112]
  31. Eur J Health Econ. 2016 Nov;17(8):939-950 [PMID: 26497027]
  32. Stat Methods Med Res. 2002 Dec;11(6):539-51 [PMID: 12516988]
  33. Health Econ. 2002 Sep;11(6):551-66 [PMID: 12203757]
  34. Eur J Health Econ. 2016 Nov;17(8):927-938 [PMID: 26445961]
  35. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(12):1079-96 [PMID: 21080734]
  36. Perspect Clin Res. 2012 Jan;3(1):40 [PMID: 22347702]
  37. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2005;4(2):65-75 [PMID: 16162026]
  38. Stat Med. 2000 Dec 15;19(23):3219-36 [PMID: 11113956]
  39. Health Econ. 2020 Feb;29(2):171-184 [PMID: 31845455]
  40. Value Health. 2021 May;24(5):699-706 [PMID: 33933239]
  41. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2018 Mar 28;10:80-85 [PMID: 29696162]
  42. Health Econ. 2018 Nov;27(11):1670-1683 [PMID: 29969834]
  43. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001 Winter;17(1):69-82 [PMID: 11329846]
  44. Med Decis Making. 2021 Aug;41(6):667-684 [PMID: 33813933]
  45. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Feb 15;17(1):27 [PMID: 28202010]
  46. Health Econ. 2003 May;12(5):377-92 [PMID: 12720255]
  47. West J Emerg Med. 2017 Oct;18(6):1075-1078 [PMID: 29085540]
  48. Stat Med. 2019 Apr 15;38(8):1399-1420 [PMID: 30565727]
  49. J Health Econ. 2004 May;23(3):615-25 [PMID: 15120473]
  50. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(10):843-62 [PMID: 17887806]
  51. Educ Psychol Meas. 2018 Apr;78(2):297-318 [PMID: 29795957]
  52. Health Econ. 2005 May;14(5):487-96 [PMID: 15497198]
  53. Health Econ. 2012 Jun;21(6):695-714 [PMID: 21633989]
  54. Health Econ. 2005 Aug;14(8):763-76 [PMID: 15729743]
  55. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014 Dec;32(12):1157-70 [PMID: 25069632]
  56. Health Econ. 2012 Sep;21(9):1101-18 [PMID: 22461149]
  57. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27(6):519-28 [PMID: 19640014]
  58. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015 Apr;33(4):355-66 [PMID: 25595871]
  59. Stat Med. 2004 Apr 30;23(8):1297-309 [PMID: 15083484]
  60. Health Econ. 2005 Dec;14(12):1217-29 [PMID: 15945043]
  61. Health Econ Rev. 2013 Mar 28;3(1):8 [PMID: 23537421]
  62. Stat Med. 2016 Sep 10;35(20):3482-96 [PMID: 26990655]
  63. Health Econ. 2009 Jan;18(1):91-101 [PMID: 18435426]
  64. Stat Methods Med Res. 2016 Oct;25(5):2036-2052 [PMID: 24346164]
  65. Health Econ. 2007 Aug;16(8):815-26 [PMID: 17191271]
  66. Health Econ. 2002 Jul;11(5):415-30 [PMID: 12112491]
  67. Pharmacoecon Open. 2017 Jun;1(2):79-97 [PMID: 29442336]
  68. Stat Med. 2007 Oct 15;26(23):4273-92 [PMID: 17330248]
  69. Health Econ. 2005 Feb;14(2):185-96 [PMID: 15386660]
  70. Health Econ. 1997 May-Jun;6(3):243-52 [PMID: 9226142]
  71. J Occup Environ Med. 2014 Jun;56(6):563-72 [PMID: 24854249]
  72. Clin Trials. 2014 Oct;11(5):590-600 [PMID: 24902924]
  73. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Aug;36(8):889-901 [PMID: 29679317]
  74. Springerplus. 2013 May 14;2(1):222 [PMID: 23853744]
  75. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2020 Feb;183(2):607-629 [PMID: 34385761]
  76. Value Health. 2021 Apr;24(4):539-547 [PMID: 33840432]
  77. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2007 Sep 06;5:12 [PMID: 17822546]
  78. Health Econ. 2004 May;13(5):461-75 [PMID: 15127426]
  79. Health Econ. 2012 Feb;21(2):187-200 [PMID: 22223561]
  80. Med Decis Making. 2012 Mar-Apr;32(2):350-61 [PMID: 22016450]
  81. Health Econ. 2000 Oct;9(7):599-609 [PMID: 11103926]
  82. Clin Trials. 2007;4(2):154-61 [PMID: 17456514]
  83. Value Health. 2006 Sep-Oct;9(5):334-40 [PMID: 16961551]
  84. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001 Winter;17(1):83-97 [PMID: 11329847]
  85. J Med Econ. 2012;15(3):434-43 [PMID: 22196038]
  86. Health Econ. 2010 Mar;19(3):316-33 [PMID: 19378353]
  87. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005 Summer;21(3):403-9 [PMID: 16110722]
  88. Stat Med. 2010 Jul 20;29(16):1696-709 [PMID: 20572119]
  89. Stat Med. 2006 May 15;25(9):1561-76 [PMID: 16158412]
  90. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Jun;65(6):686-95 [PMID: 22459429]
  91. Pharmacoeconomics. 2020 Nov;38(11):1247-1261 [PMID: 32729091]
  92. Med Decis Making. 2013 Apr;33(3):437-50 [PMID: 23054366]
  93. Stat Med. 2005 Jan 15;24(1):131-45 [PMID: 15515137]
  94. BMJ. 2011 Apr 07;342:d1548 [PMID: 21474510]

MeSH Term

Humans
Cost-Benefit Analysis

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0methodsstatisticalassessedtrial-basedeconomicdatacostsevaluationseffectsavailablereviewbaselineskewedcomprehensiveoverviewstudiesdealingimbalancesand/orcorrelatedclusteredlongitudinalmissingcensoringdescribed2740%analysisqualityoftensuboptimallackingThereforesummarizedcriticallyappraisedliteraturesearchperformedidentifyDataextractedadvantagesdisadvantagesrelativeperformancerecommendationsstudySixty-eightincluded3957%1826%710%2638%1015%identifiednarrativelyprovidescommoncomplexitiesHerewithcanprovidevaluableinputresearchersdecidinguseevaluationscopingevaluations:currentstateplayimbalanceclinicaltrialcost-effectivenessmethodologymultilevelmultipleimputation

Similar Articles

Cited By