4.4 Article

Conducting Trial-Based Economic Evaluations Using R: A Tutorial

期刊

PHARMACOECONOMICS
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ADIS INT LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s40273-023-01301-7

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Trial-based economic evaluations face methodological challenges such as missing data, correlated costs and effects, baseline imbalances, and skewed costs and effects. Inappropriate methods can bias results and hinder healthcare decision-making. This tutorial provides step-by-step guidance on combining appropriate statistical methods to address these challenges using an R script, with theoretical background and illustration using a simulated trial-based economic evaluation.
Trial-based economic evaluations are increasingly being conducted to support healthcare decision-making. When analysing trial-based economic evaluation data, different methodological challenges may be encountered, including (i) missing data, (ii) correlated costs and effects, (iii) baseline imbalances and (iv) skewness of costs and/or effects. Despite the broad range of methods available to account for these methodological challenges in effectiveness studies, they may not always be directly applicable in trial-based economic evaluations where costs and effects are analysed jointly, and more than one methodological challenge typically needs to be addressed simultaneously. The use of inappropriate methods can bias results and conclusions regarding the cost-effectiveness of healthcare interventions. Eventually, such low-quality evidence can hamper healthcare decision-making, which may in turn result in a waste of already scarce healthcare resources. Therefore, this tutorial aims to provide step-by-step guidance on how to combine appropriate statistical methods for handling the abovementioned methodological challenges using a ready-to-use R script. The theoretical background of the described methods is provided, and their application is illustrated using a simulated trial-based economic evaluation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据