IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v25y2005i4p416-423.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Simon G. Thompson

    (MRC Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health, Cambridge, UK, simon.thompson@mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk)

  • Richard M. Nixon

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

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Simon G. Thompson & Richard M. Nixon, 2005. "How Sensitive Are Cost-Effectiveness Analyses to Choice of Parametric Distributions?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 25(4), pages 416-423, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:25:y:2005:i:4:p:416-423
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X05276862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X05276862
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X05276862?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Partha Deb & James F. Burgess, Jr., 2003. "A Quasi-experimental Comparison of Econometric Models for Health Care Expenditures," Economics Working Paper Archive at Hunter College 212, Hunter College Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Noémi Kreif & Richard Grieve & M. Zia Sadique, 2013. "Statistical Methods For Cost‐Effectiveness Analyses That Use Observational Data: A Critical Appraisal Tool And Review Of Current Practice," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(4), pages 486-500, April.
    2. Thompson, Simon G. & Nixon, Richard M. & Grieve, Richard, 2006. "Addressing the issues that arise in analysing multicentre cost data, with application to a multinational study," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 1015-1028, November.
    3. Caterina Conigliani, 2008. "A bayesian model averaging approach with non-informative priors for cost-effectiveness analyses in health economics," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0094, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    4. Moreno, Elías & Girón, F.J. & Vázquez-Polo, F.J. & NegrI´n, M.A., 2010. "Optimal healthcare decisions: Comparing medical treatments on a cost-effectiveness basis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 204(1), pages 180-187, July.
    5. Andrea Gabrio & Michael J. Daniels & Gianluca Baio, 2020. "A Bayesian parametric approach to handle missing longitudinal outcome data in trial‐based health economic evaluations," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(2), pages 607-629, February.
    6. Daniel P Beavers & James D Stamey, 2018. "Bayesian sample size determination for cost-effectiveness studies with censored data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, January.
    7. Alexina J. Mason & Manuel Gomes & James Carpenter & Richard Grieve, 2021. "Flexible Bayesian longitudinal models for cost‐effectiveness analyses with informative missing data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(12), pages 3138-3158, December.
    8. Yizhe Xu & Tom H. Greene & Adam P. Bress & Brian C. Sauer & Brandon K. Bellows & Yue Zhang & William S. Weintraub & Andrew E. Moran & Jincheng Shen, 2022. "Estimating the optimal individualized treatment rule from a cost‐effectiveness perspective," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 337-351, March.
    9. Caterina Conigliani & Andrea Tancredi, 2006. "Comparing parametric and semi-parametric approaches for bayesian cost-effectiveness analyses in health economics," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0064, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    10. Bruce Y Lee & Sarah M McGlone & Rachel R Bailey & Ann E Wiringa & Shanta M Zimmer & Kenneth J Smith & Richard K Zimmerman, 2010. "To Test or to Treat? An Analysis of Influenza Testing and Antiviral Treatment Strategies Using Economic Computer Modeling," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(6), pages 1-11, June.
    11. Alexina J. Mason & Manuel Gomes & Richard Grieve & James R. Carpenter, 2018. "A Bayesian framework for health economic evaluation in studies with missing data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(11), pages 1670-1683, November.
    12. Bebu, Ionut & Luta, George & Mathew, Thomas & Kennedy, Paul A. & Agan, Brian K., 2016. "Parametric cost-effectiveness inference with skewed data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 210-220.
    13. Denise Bijlenga & Gouke J. Bonsel & Erwin Birnie, 2011. "Eliciting willingness to pay in obstetrics: comparing a direct and an indirect valuation method for complex health outcomes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(11), pages 1392-1406, November.
    14. Daniele Bregantini, 2014. "Don’t Stop ’Til You Get Enough: a quickest detection approach to HTA," Discussion Papers 14/04, Department of Economics, University of York.
    15. Caterina Conigliani & Andrea Tancredi, 2009. "A Bayesian model averaging approach for cost‐effectiveness analyses," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(7), pages 807-821, July.
    16. Lemoine, Coralie & Loubière, Sandrine & Boucekine, Mohamed & Girard, Vincent & Tinland, Aurélie & Auquier, Pascal, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of housing first intervention with an independent housing and team support for homeless people with severe mental illness: A Markov model informed by a randomized controlle," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    17. Borislava Mihaylova & Andrew Briggs & Anthony O'Hagan & Simon G. Thompson, 2011. "Review of statistical methods for analysing healthcare resources and costs," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(8), pages 897-916, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sungchul Park & Anirban Basu, 2018. "Alternative evaluation metrics for risk adjustment methods," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(6), pages 984-1010, June.
    2. Nils Gutacker & Chris Bojke & Silvio Daidone & Nancy J. Devlin & David Parkin & Andrew Street, 2013. "Truly Inefficient Or Providing Better Quality Of Care? Analysing The Relationship Between Risk‐Adjusted Hospital Costs And Patients' Health Outcomes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(8), pages 931-947, August.
    3. Andrew Briggs & Richard Nixon & Simon Dixon & Simon Thompson, 2005. "Parametric modelling of cost data: some simulation evidence," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(4), pages 421-428, April.
    4. Caravaggio, Nicola & Resce, Giuliano, 2023. "Enhancing Healthcare Cost Forecasting: A Machine Learning Model for Resource Allocation in Heterogeneous Regions," Economics & Statistics Discussion Papers esdp23090, University of Molise, Department of Economics.
    5. Sriubaite, I. & Harris, A. & Jones, A.M. & Gabbe, B., 2020. "Economic Consequences of Road Traffic Injuries. Application of the Super Learner algorithm," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 20/20, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    6. Richard M. Nixon & Simon G. Thompson, 2005. "Methods for incorporating covariate adjustment, subgroup analysis and between‐centre differences into cost‐effectiveness evaluations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(12), pages 1217-1229, December.
    7. Matthias Eckardt & Christian Brettschneider & Hendrik van den Bussche & Hans‐Helmut König & MultiCare Study Group, 2017. "Analysis of Health Care Costs in Elderly Patients with Multiple Chronic Conditions Using a Finite Mixture of Generalized Linear Models," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(5), pages 582-599, May.
    8. Besstremyannaya, Galina, 2017. "Measuring income equity in the demand for healthcare with finite mixture models," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 46, pages 5-29.
    9. Steven C. Hill & G. Edward Miller, 2010. "Health expenditure estimation and functional form: applications of the generalized gamma and extended estimating equations models," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(5), pages 608-627, May.
    10. Jones, A. & Lomas, J. & Rice, N., 2014. "Going Beyond the Mean in Healthcare Cost Regressions: a Comparison of Methods for Estimating the Full Conditional Distribution," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 14/26, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    11. Andrew M. Jones & James Lomas & Peter T. Moore & Nigel Rice, 2016. "A quasi-Monte-Carlo comparison of parametric and semiparametric regression methods for heavy-tailed and non-normal data: an application to healthcare costs," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 179(4), pages 951-974, October.
    12. Borislava Mihaylova & Andrew Briggs & Anthony O'Hagan & Simon G. Thompson, 2011. "Review of statistical methods for analysing healthcare resources and costs," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(8), pages 897-916, August.
    13. Kasteridis, Panagiotis & Rice, Nigel & Santos, Rita, 2022. "Heterogeneity in end of life health care expenditure trajectory profiles," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 221-251.
    14. Amal Malehi & Fatemeh Pourmotahari & Kambiz Angali, 2015. "Statistical models for the analysis of skewed healthcare cost data: a simulation study," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-16, December.
    15. Andrew M. Jones & James Lomas & Nigel Rice, 2014. "Applying Beta‐Type Size Distributions To Healthcare Cost Regressions," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 649-670, June.
    16. Andrew M. Jones & James Lomas & Nigel Rice, 2015. "Healthcare Cost Regressions: Going Beyond the Mean to Estimate the Full Distribution," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(9), pages 1192-1212, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:25:y:2005:i:4:p:416-423. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.