ReviewPharmacoEconomics2015
An educational review of the statistical issues in analysing utility data for cost-utility analysis.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
52 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Total ankle replacement versus ankle arthrodesis for patients aged 50-85 years with end-stage ankle osteoarthritis: the TARVA RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2023Pooled it
- Trial
- Manualised package intervention to achieve treatment adherence in people with tuberculosis: the IMPACT pilot cluster-RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Trial
- Funding Health Promotion Activities to Reduce Avoidable Hospital Admissions in Frail Older Adults (HomeHealth): Further Challenges to the "Cost-Effective but Unaffordable" Paradox.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Trial
- Cost-utility analysis of a collaborative and stepped care model in patients with mental disorders in German primary care (the COMET study).BMC psychiatry · 2025Trial
- Psychiatric advance directives facilitated by peer workers among people with mental illness: economic evaluation of a randomized controlled trial (DAiP study).Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2023Trial
- REFINE (REduced Frequency ImmuNE checkpoint inhibition in cancers): A multi-arm phase II basket trial testing reduced intensity immunotherapy across different cancers.Contemporary clinical trials · 2023Trial
- Economic evaluation of a complex intervention (Engager) for prisoners with common mental health problems, near to and after release: a cost-utility and cost-consequences analysis.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Modifying the quality-adjusted life year calculation to account for meaningful change in health-related quality of life: insights from a pragmatic clinical trial.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2021Trial
- Fall prevention interventions in primary care to reduce fractures and falls in people aged 70 years and over: the PreFIT three-arm cluster RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2021Trial
- Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery compared with phacoemulsification: the FACT non-inferiority RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2021Trial
- Six versus 12 months' adjuvant trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer: the PERSEPHONE non-inferiority RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Methods for Analysing Patient-Level Utility Data: Insights from the Literature Review and Recent NICE Technology Appraisals.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Review
- Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of Everyday Life Rehabilitation (ELR) for individuals with serious mental illness in supported accommodation.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Article
- Cost Utility of Specialist Physiotherapy for Functional Motor Disorder (Physio4FMD): Economic Analysis of a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of cost-utility analysis is to support decision making in healthcare by providing a standardised mechanism for comparing resource use and health outcomes across programmes of work. The focus of this paper is the denominator of the cost-utility analysis, specifically the methodology and statistical challenges associated with calculating QALYs from patient-level data collected as part of a trial. We provide a brief description of the most common questionnaire used to calculate patient level utility scores, the EQ-5D, followed by a discussion of other ways to calculate patient level utility scores alongside a trial including other generic measures of health-related quality of life and condition- and population-specific questionnaires. Detail is provided on how to calculate the mean QALYs per patient, including discounting, adjusting for baseline differences in utility scores and a discussion of the implications of different methods for handling missing data. The methods are demonstrated using data from a trial. As the methods chosen can systematically change the results of the analysis, it is important that standardised methods such as patient-level analysis are adhered to as best as possible. Regardless, researchers need to ensure that they are sufficiently transparent about the methods they use so as to provide the best possible information to aid in healthcare decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25595871What 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.