ReviewPharmacoEconomics2006
'Lost in translation': accounting for between-country differences in the analysis of multinational cost-effectiveness data.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic Review of Tools and Approaches for Evaluating the Transferability of Health Technology Assessments Across Different Jurisdictions.International journal of health policy and management · 2024Pooled it
- Barriers to generalizability of health economic evaluations in Latin America and the Caribbean region.PharmacoEconomics · 2009Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of a structured medication review approach for multimorbid older adults: Within-trial analysis of the OPERAM study.PloS one · 2022Trial
- Design of an international multicentre RCT on group schema therapy for borderline personality disorder.BMC psychiatry · 2014Trial
- Escitalopram and duloxetine in major depressive disorder: a pharmacoeconomic comparison using UK cost data.PharmacoEconomics · 2008Trial
- Article
- A one stop shop for cost-effectiveness evidence? Recommendations for improving Disease Control Priorities.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2019Article
- Establishing benchmark EQ-5D-3L population health state utilities and identifying their correlates in Gansu Province, China.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2017Article
- The use of random-effects models to identify health care center-related characteristics modifying the effect of antipsychotic drugs.Clinical epidemiology · 2017Article
- Incorporating Demand and Supply Constraints into Economic Evaluations in Low-Income and Middle-Income Countries.Health economics · 2016Article
- Prioritizing health system and disease burden factors: an evaluation of the net benefit of transferring health technology interventions to different districts in Zimbabwe.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2016Article
- Refitting of the UKPDS 68 risk equations to contemporary routine clinical practice data in the UK.PharmacoEconomics · 2015Article
- Economic studies in colorectal cancer: challenges in measuring and comparing costs.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2013Review
- Article
- Cost-analysis of XELOX and FOLFOX4 for treatment of colorectal cancer to assist decision-making on reimbursement.BMC cancer · 2011Article
- Integrated surveys of neglected tropical diseases in southern Sudan: how much do they cost and can they be refined?PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2010Article
- Review
- The analysis of multinational cost-effectiveness data for reimbursement decisions: a critical appraisal of recent methodological developments.PharmacoEconomics · 2010Article
- Bayesian modelling of healthcare resource use in multinational randomized clinical trials.PharmacoEconomics · 2009Article
- Self-measurement of blood glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes: a health economic assessment.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cost-effectiveness analysis has gained status over the last 15 years as an important tool for assisting resource allocation decisions in a budget-limited environment such as healthcare. Randomised (multicentre) multinational controlled trials are often the main vehicle for collecting primary patient-level information on resource use, cost and clinical effectiveness associated with alternative treatment strategies. However, trial-wide cost effectiveness results may not be directly applicable to any one of the countries that participate in a multinational trial, requiring some form of additional modelling to customise the results to the country of interest. This article proposes an algorithm to assist with the choice of the appropriate analytical strategy when facing the task of adapting the study results from one country to another. The algorithm considers different scenarios characterised by: (a) whether the country of interest participated in the trial; and (b) whether individual patient-level data (IPD) from the trial are available. The analytical options available range from the use of regression-based techniques to the application of decision-analytic models. Decision models are typically used when the evidence base is available exclusively in summary format whereas regression-based methods are used mainly when the country of interest actively recruited patients into the trial and there is access to IPD (or at least country-specific summary data). Whichever method is used to reflect between-country variability in cost-effectiveness data, it is important to be transparent regarding the assumptions made in the analysis and (where possible) assess their impact on the study results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.