Incorporating external evidence in trial-based cost-effectiveness analyses: the use of resampling methods
Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) that use patient-specific data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) are popular, yet such CEAs are criticized because they neglect to incorporate evidence external to the trial. A popular method for quantifying uncertainty in a RCT-based CEA is the bootstrap. T...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Trials 2014-06, Vol.15 (1), p.201-201, Article 201 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 201 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 201 |
container_title | Trials |
container_volume | 15 |
creator | Sadatsafavi, Mohsen Marra, Carlo Aaron, Shawn Bryan, Stirling |
description | Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) that use patient-specific data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) are popular, yet such CEAs are criticized because they neglect to incorporate evidence external to the trial. A popular method for quantifying uncertainty in a RCT-based CEA is the bootstrap. The objective of the present study was to further expand the bootstrap method of RCT-based CEA for the incorporation of external evidence.
We utilize the Bayesian interpretation of the bootstrap and derive the distribution for the cost and effectiveness outcomes after observing the current RCT data and the external evidence. We propose simple modifications of the bootstrap for sampling from such posterior distributions.
In a proof-of-concept case study, we use data from a clinical trial and incorporate external evidence on the effect size of treatments to illustrate the method in action. Compared to the parametric models of evidence synthesis, the proposed approach requires fewer distributional assumptions, does not require explicit modeling of the relation between external evidence and outcomes of interest, and is generally easier to implement. A drawback of this approach is potential computational inefficiency compared to the parametric Bayesian methods.
The bootstrap method of RCT-based CEA can be extended to incorporate external evidence, while preserving its appealing features such as no requirement for parametric modeling of cost and effectiveness outcomes. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1186/1745-6215-15-201 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4055939</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1535626228</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b456t-a39ada33268de9946d10389067e2b3ea0d81b832c7e845ef64e816e50cb703be3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc1rGzEQxUVpaVIn956Cjr1sq6-VtT0EgknbQKCX9iy02tlYYVdyNbJJ_vvIODUJtDAgoXn6jfQeIR85-8y50V_4UrWNFrxtagnG35DT49HbF_sT8gHxnjElO6nekxOhjDGy1ack3ESf8iZlV0K8o_BQIEc3UdiFAaIHGiItObip6R3CQH3C0sA4gi9hBxEQqav6RwT8Sssa6BaBppFmQDdvpj1zhrJOA56Rd6ObEM6f1wX5_e361-pHc_vz-83q6rbpVatL42TnBiel0GaArlN64EyajukliF6CY4PhvZHCL8GoFkatwHANLfP9kske5IJcHribbT_D4CGW7Ca7yWF2-dEmF-zrTgxre5d2VrG27apBC7I6APqQ_gN43fFptnur7d5qW6smUSmfnp-R058tYLFzQA_T5CKkLVZZ9V9oIUyVsoPU54SYYTzO4szuc_4X_eLlJ48X_gYrnwDqWqZ_</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1535626228</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Incorporating external evidence in trial-based cost-effectiveness analyses: the use of resampling methods</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</source><creator>Sadatsafavi, Mohsen ; Marra, Carlo ; Aaron, Shawn ; Bryan, Stirling</creator><creatorcontrib>Sadatsafavi, Mohsen ; Marra, Carlo ; Aaron, Shawn ; Bryan, Stirling</creatorcontrib><description>Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) that use patient-specific data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) are popular, yet such CEAs are criticized because they neglect to incorporate evidence external to the trial. A popular method for quantifying uncertainty in a RCT-based CEA is the bootstrap. The objective of the present study was to further expand the bootstrap method of RCT-based CEA for the incorporation of external evidence.
We utilize the Bayesian interpretation of the bootstrap and derive the distribution for the cost and effectiveness outcomes after observing the current RCT data and the external evidence. We propose simple modifications of the bootstrap for sampling from such posterior distributions.
In a proof-of-concept case study, we use data from a clinical trial and incorporate external evidence on the effect size of treatments to illustrate the method in action. Compared to the parametric models of evidence synthesis, the proposed approach requires fewer distributional assumptions, does not require explicit modeling of the relation between external evidence and outcomes of interest, and is generally easier to implement. A drawback of this approach is potential computational inefficiency compared to the parametric Bayesian methods.
The bootstrap method of RCT-based CEA can be extended to incorporate external evidence, while preserving its appealing features such as no requirement for parametric modeling of cost and effectiveness outcomes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1745-6215</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1745-6215</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-201</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24888356</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BioMed Central Ltd</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Bayes Theorem ; Cost-Benefit Analysis - economics ; Cost-Benefit Analysis - methods ; Evidence-Based Medicine - economics ; Evidence-Based Medicine - methods ; Humans ; Methodology ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - economics ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods ; Research Design - statistics & numerical data ; Sampling Studies ; Statistics, Nonparametric</subject><ispartof>Trials, 2014-06, Vol.15 (1), p.201-201, Article 201</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2014 Sadatsafavi et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 Sadatsafavi et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b456t-a39ada33268de9946d10389067e2b3ea0d81b832c7e845ef64e816e50cb703be3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b456t-a39ada33268de9946d10389067e2b3ea0d81b832c7e845ef64e816e50cb703be3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4055939/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4055939/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24888356$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sadatsafavi, Mohsen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marra, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aaron, Shawn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bryan, Stirling</creatorcontrib><title>Incorporating external evidence in trial-based cost-effectiveness analyses: the use of resampling methods</title><title>Trials</title><addtitle>Trials</addtitle><description>Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) that use patient-specific data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) are popular, yet such CEAs are criticized because they neglect to incorporate evidence external to the trial. A popular method for quantifying uncertainty in a RCT-based CEA is the bootstrap. The objective of the present study was to further expand the bootstrap method of RCT-based CEA for the incorporation of external evidence.
We utilize the Bayesian interpretation of the bootstrap and derive the distribution for the cost and effectiveness outcomes after observing the current RCT data and the external evidence. We propose simple modifications of the bootstrap for sampling from such posterior distributions.
In a proof-of-concept case study, we use data from a clinical trial and incorporate external evidence on the effect size of treatments to illustrate the method in action. Compared to the parametric models of evidence synthesis, the proposed approach requires fewer distributional assumptions, does not require explicit modeling of the relation between external evidence and outcomes of interest, and is generally easier to implement. A drawback of this approach is potential computational inefficiency compared to the parametric Bayesian methods.
The bootstrap method of RCT-based CEA can be extended to incorporate external evidence, while preserving its appealing features such as no requirement for parametric modeling of cost and effectiveness outcomes.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Bayes Theorem</subject><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis - economics</subject><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis - methods</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Medicine - economics</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Medicine - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Methodology</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - economics</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods</subject><subject>Research Design - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Sampling Studies</subject><subject>Statistics, Nonparametric</subject><issn>1745-6215</issn><issn>1745-6215</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc1rGzEQxUVpaVIn956Cjr1sq6-VtT0EgknbQKCX9iy02tlYYVdyNbJJ_vvIODUJtDAgoXn6jfQeIR85-8y50V_4UrWNFrxtagnG35DT49HbF_sT8gHxnjElO6nekxOhjDGy1ack3ESf8iZlV0K8o_BQIEc3UdiFAaIHGiItObip6R3CQH3C0sA4gi9hBxEQqav6RwT8Sssa6BaBppFmQDdvpj1zhrJOA56Rd6ObEM6f1wX5_e361-pHc_vz-83q6rbpVatL42TnBiel0GaArlN64EyajukliF6CY4PhvZHCL8GoFkatwHANLfP9kske5IJcHribbT_D4CGW7Ca7yWF2-dEmF-zrTgxre5d2VrG27apBC7I6APqQ_gN43fFptnur7d5qW6smUSmfnp-R058tYLFzQA_T5CKkLVZZ9V9oIUyVsoPU54SYYTzO4szuc_4X_eLlJ48X_gYrnwDqWqZ_</recordid><startdate>20140603</startdate><enddate>20140603</enddate><creator>Sadatsafavi, Mohsen</creator><creator>Marra, Carlo</creator><creator>Aaron, Shawn</creator><creator>Bryan, Stirling</creator><general>BioMed Central Ltd</general><general>BioMed Central</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140603</creationdate><title>Incorporating external evidence in trial-based cost-effectiveness analyses: the use of resampling methods</title><author>Sadatsafavi, Mohsen ; Marra, Carlo ; Aaron, Shawn ; Bryan, Stirling</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b456t-a39ada33268de9946d10389067e2b3ea0d81b832c7e845ef64e816e50cb703be3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Bayes Theorem</topic><topic>Cost-Benefit Analysis - economics</topic><topic>Cost-Benefit Analysis - methods</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Medicine - economics</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Medicine - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Methodology</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - economics</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods</topic><topic>Research Design - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Sampling Studies</topic><topic>Statistics, Nonparametric</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sadatsafavi, Mohsen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marra, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aaron, Shawn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bryan, Stirling</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Trials</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sadatsafavi, Mohsen</au><au>Marra, Carlo</au><au>Aaron, Shawn</au><au>Bryan, Stirling</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Incorporating external evidence in trial-based cost-effectiveness analyses: the use of resampling methods</atitle><jtitle>Trials</jtitle><addtitle>Trials</addtitle><date>2014-06-03</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>201</spage><epage>201</epage><pages>201-201</pages><artnum>201</artnum><issn>1745-6215</issn><eissn>1745-6215</eissn><abstract>Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) that use patient-specific data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) are popular, yet such CEAs are criticized because they neglect to incorporate evidence external to the trial. A popular method for quantifying uncertainty in a RCT-based CEA is the bootstrap. The objective of the present study was to further expand the bootstrap method of RCT-based CEA for the incorporation of external evidence.
We utilize the Bayesian interpretation of the bootstrap and derive the distribution for the cost and effectiveness outcomes after observing the current RCT data and the external evidence. We propose simple modifications of the bootstrap for sampling from such posterior distributions.
In a proof-of-concept case study, we use data from a clinical trial and incorporate external evidence on the effect size of treatments to illustrate the method in action. Compared to the parametric models of evidence synthesis, the proposed approach requires fewer distributional assumptions, does not require explicit modeling of the relation between external evidence and outcomes of interest, and is generally easier to implement. A drawback of this approach is potential computational inefficiency compared to the parametric Bayesian methods.
The bootstrap method of RCT-based CEA can be extended to incorporate external evidence, while preserving its appealing features such as no requirement for parametric modeling of cost and effectiveness outcomes.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BioMed Central Ltd</pub><pmid>24888356</pmid><doi>10.1186/1745-6215-15-201</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1745-6215 |
ispartof | Trials, 2014-06, Vol.15 (1), p.201-201, Article 201 |
issn | 1745-6215 1745-6215 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4055939 |
source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; SpringerLink Journals; PubMed Central; PubMed Central Open Access; Springer Nature OA Free Journals |
subjects | Algorithms Bayes Theorem Cost-Benefit Analysis - economics Cost-Benefit Analysis - methods Evidence-Based Medicine - economics Evidence-Based Medicine - methods Humans Methodology Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - economics Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods Research Design - statistics & numerical data Sampling Studies Statistics, Nonparametric |
title | Incorporating external evidence in trial-based cost-effectiveness analyses: the use of resampling methods |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T02%3A51%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Incorporating%20external%20evidence%20in%20trial-based%20cost-effectiveness%20analyses:%20the%20use%20of%20resampling%20methods&rft.jtitle=Trials&rft.au=Sadatsafavi,%20Mohsen&rft.date=2014-06-03&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=201&rft.epage=201&rft.pages=201-201&rft.artnum=201&rft.issn=1745-6215&rft.eissn=1745-6215&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/1745-6215-15-201&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1535626228%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1535626228&rft_id=info:pmid/24888356&rfr_iscdi=true |