Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Medical Decision Making
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Thompson, S. G.
Right arrow Articles by Nixon, R. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Thompson, S. G.
Right arrow Articles by Nixon, R. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

How Sensitive Are Cost-Effectiveness Analyses to Choice of Parametric Distributions?

Simon G. Thompson, DSc

MRC Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health, Cambridge, UK, simon.thompson{at}mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk

Richard M. Nixon, PhD

MRC Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health, Cambridge, UK

Background. Cost-effectiveness analyses of clinical trial data are based on assumptions about the distributions of costs and effects. Cost data usually have very skewed distributions and can be difficult to model. The authors investigate whether choice of distribution can make a difference to the conclusions drawn.Methods. The authors compare 3 distributions for cost data—normal, gamma, and lognormal—using similar parametric models for the cost-effectiveness analyses. Inferences on the cost-effectiveness plane are derived, together with cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. These methods are applied to data from a trial of rapid magnetic resonance imaging (rMRI) investigation in patients with low back pain.Results. The gamma and lognormal distributions fitted the cost data much better than the normal distribution. However, in terms of inferences about cost-effectiveness, it was the normal and gamma distributions that gave similar results. Using the lognormal distribution led to the conclusion that rMRI was cost-effective for a range of willingness-to-pay values where assuming a gamma or normal distribution did not.Conclusions. Conclusions from cost-effectiveness analyses are sensitive to choice of distribution and, in particular, to how the upper tail of the cost distribution beyond the observed data is modeled. How well a distribution fits the data is an insufficient guide to model choice. A sensitivity analysis is therefore necessary to address uncertainty about choice of distribution.

Key Words: cost-effectiveness analysis • parametric methods • distributional assumptions • sensitivity analysis • robustness

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 25, No. 4, 416-423 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X05276862
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Clin TrialsHome page
A. Burton, L. J. Billingham, and S. Bryan
Cost-effectiveness in clinical trials: using multiple imputation to deal with incomplete cost data
Clinical Trials, April 1, 2007; 4(2): 154 - 161.
[Abstract] [PDF]