Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 2
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    2015. Health Technology Assessment.


    Govetto, Andrea Virgili, Gianni Menchini, Francesca Lanzetta, Paolo and Menchini, Ugo 2013. A Systematic Review of Endophthalmitis after Microincisional versus 20-Gauge Vitrectomy. Ophthalmology, Vol. 120, Issue. 11, p. 2286.


    ×
  • International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Volume 25, Issue 4
  • October 2009, pp. 546-554

Handling uncertainty in economic evaluations of patient level data: A review of the use of Bayesian methods to inform health technology assessments

  • C. Elizabeth McCarron (a1), Eleanor M. Pullenayegum (a2), Deborah A. Marshall (a3), Ron Goeree (a4) and Jean-Eric Tarride (a1)
  • DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462309990316
  • Published online: 22 October 2009
Abstract

Objectives: Due to potential advantages (e.g., using all available evidence), Bayesian methods have been proposed to assist healthcare decision making. This review provides a detailed description of how Bayesian methods have been applied to economic evaluations of patient level data. The results serve both as a reference and as a means by which to examine the appropriate application of Bayesian methods to inform decision making.

Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Economic Evaluation databases were searched to identify studies, published up to November 2007, meeting three inclusion criteria: (i) the study conducted an economic evaluation, (ii) sampling uncertainty was incorporated using Bayesian methods, (iii) the likelihood function was informed by patient level data from a single source. Data were collected on key study characteristics (e.g., prior distribution, likelihood function, presentation of uncertainty).

Results: The search identified 366 potentially relevant studies, from which 103 studies underwent full-text review. Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Half of the studies used uninformative priors; most studies incorporated the potential dependence between costs and effects, and presented cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results were sensitive to changes in the priors and likelihoods.

Conclusions: Limited use of informative priors, among the included studies, gives policy makers little guidance on one of the main benefits of Bayesian methods, the ability to integrate all available evidence to capture the uncertainty inherent in decision making.

Copyright
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

1.MJ Al , BA Van Hout . A Bayesian approach to economic analyses of clinical trials: the case of stenting versus balloon angioplasty. Health Econ. 2000;9:599609.

2. D Ashby . Bayesian statistics in medicine: A 25 year review. Stat Med. 2006;25:35893631.

3.MO Bachmann , L Fairall , A Clark , M Mugford . Methods for analyzing cost effectiveness data from cluster randomized trials. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2007;5:12.

4. AH Briggs . A Bayesian approach to stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis: An illustration and application to blood pressure control in type 2 diabetes. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001;17:6982.

5.AH Briggs . handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models. Pharmacoeconomics. 2000;17:479500.

7. E Fenwick , J Wilson , M Sculpher , K Claxton . Pre-operative optimisation employing dopexamine or adrenaline for patients undergoing major elective surgery: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2002;28:599608.

8.DG Fryback , JO Chinnis , JW Ulvila . Bayesian cost-effectiveness analysis: An example using the GUSTO trial. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001;17:8397.

9.S Hahn , A Whitehead . An illustration of the modelling of cost and efficacy data from a clinical trial. Stat Med. 2003;22:10091024.

10. DF Heitjan , CY Kim , H Li . Bayesian estimation of cost-effectiveness from censored data. Stat Med. 2004;23:12971309.

11. DF Heitjan , H Li . Bayesian estimation of cost-effectiveness: An importance-sampling approach. Health Econ. 2004;13:191198.

12. DF Heitjan , AJ Moskowitz , W Whang . Bayesian estimation of cost-effectiveness ratios from clinical trials. Health Econ. 1999;8:191201.

13. AP Johnson-Masotti , PW Laud , RG Hoffmann , MJ Hayat , SD Pinkerton . Probabilistic cost-effectiveness analysis of HIV prevention comparing a Bayesian approach with traditional deterministic sensitivity analysis. Eval Rev. 2001;25:474502.

14. MA Negrin , FJ Vazquez-Polo . Bayesian cost-effectiveness analysis with two measures of effectiveness: The cost-effectiveness acceptability plane. Health Econ. 2006;15:363372.

16.A O'Hagan , JW Stevens . A framework for cost-effectiveness analysis from clinical trial data. Health Econ. 2001;10:303315.

17.A O'Hagan , JW Stevens . Bayesian methods for design and analysis of cost-effectiveness trials in the evaluation of health care technologies. Stat Methods Med Res. 2002;11:469490.

18. A O'Hagan , JW Stevens , J Montmartin . Bayesian cost-effectiveness analysis from clinical trial data. Stat Med. 2001;20:733753.

19. S Ramsey , R Willke , A Briggs , Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: The ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force Report. Value Health. 2005;8:521533.

20.YC Shih , NB Bekele , Y Xu . Use of Bayesian net benefit regression model to examine the impact of generic drug entry on the cost effectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in elderly depressed patients. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25:843862.

21. GH Skrepnek . The contrast and convergence of Bayesian and frequentist statistical approaches in pharmacoeconomic analysis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25:649664.

22.DJ Spiegelhalter , KR Abrams , JP Myles . Bayesian approaches to clinical trials and health-care evaluation. Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2004.


24.L Sung , J Hayden , ML Greenberg , Seven items were identified for inclusion when reporting a Bayesian analysis of a clinical study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:261268.

26. UK BEAM Trial Team. United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UKBEAM) randomised trial: cost effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care. BMJ. 2004;329:13811385.

27. FJ Vazquez-Polo , MAN Hernandez , BG Lopez-Valcarcel . Using covariates to reduce uncertainty in the economic evaluation of clinical trial data. Health Econ. 2005;14:545557.

28. FJ Vazquez-Polo , M Negrin , X Badia , M Roset . Bayesian regression models for cost-effectiveness analysis. Eur J Health Econ. 2005;6:4552.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
  • ISSN: 0266-4623
  • EISSN: 1471-6348
  • URL: /core/journals/international-journal-of-technology-assessment-in-health-care
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary Materials

McCarron supplementary material
Supplementary tables

 Unknown (81 KB)
81 KB