ReviewPharmacoEconomics - open2017
Handling Missing Data in Within-Trial Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: A Review with Future Recommendations.
Review in PharmacoEconomics - open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT07394712 (Comprehensive Maintenance Program), which is not on this map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 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.
Comprehensive Maintenance Program: a Health Haven for COPD in Lleida.The NAPOLEON Project.
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- How to prevent missing data in cost-effectiveness analyses alongside cardiovascular disease trials? A review on methods of administration of patient-reported outcomes.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Pooled it
- Handling Missing Data in Health Economics and Outcomes Research (HEOR): A Systematic Review and Practical Recommendations.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Economic Evaluation of Inguinal Versus Ilio-inguinal Lymphadenectomy for Patients with Stage III Metastatic Melanoma to Groin Lymph Nodes: Evidence from the EAGLE FM Randomized Trial.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Trial
- Shockwave lithotripsy compared with ureteroscopic stone treatment for adults with ureteric stones: the TISU non-inferiority RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2022Trial
- The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam, zonisamide, or lamotrigine for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial.Lancet (London, England) · 2021Trial
- The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of valproate versus levetiracetam for newly diagnosed generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial.Lancet (London, England) · 2021Trial
- Silver-impregnated, antibiotic-impregnated or non-impregnated ventriculoperitoneal shunts to prevent shunt infection: the BASICS three-arm RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Trial
- How Applied Researchers Engage with Methodological Tutorials: A Three-step Test Interview Study of an R Tutorial for Trial-Based Economic Evaluation.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Missing Data in Trial-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: The Journey Continues.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Review
- Poor reporting quality and high proportion of missing data in economic evaluations alongside pragmatic trials: a cross-sectional survey.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Emerging burden of post-cancer therapy complications on unplanned hospitalisation and costs among Australian cancer patients: a retrospective cohort study over 14 years.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assessing health-related quality of life among cancer survivors during systemic and radiation therapy in Bangladesh: a cancer-specific exploration.BMC cancer · 2023Article
- Conducting Trial-Based Economic Evaluations Using R: A Tutorial.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Article
- The handling of missing data in trial-based economic evaluations: should data be multiply imputed prior to longitudinal linear mixed-model analyses?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023Article
- Economic evaluation of pharmacogenomic-guided antiplatelet treatment in Spanish patients suffering from acute coronary syndrome participating in the U-PGx PREPARE study.Human genomics · 2023Article
- Cost-utility analysis of shockwave lithotripsy vs ureteroscopic stone treatment in adults.BJU international · 2023Article
- A scoping review of statistical methods for trial-based economic evaluations: The current state of play.Health economics · 2022Article
- Human and economic impacts of natural disasters: can we trust the global data?Scientific data · 2022Review
- Linear mixed models to handle missing at random data in trial-based economic evaluations.Health economics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) alongside randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are increasingly designed to collect resource use and preference-based health status data for the purpose of healthcare technology assessment. However, because of the way these measures are collected, they are prone to missing data, which can ultimately affect the decision of whether an intervention is good value for money. We examine how missing cost and effect outcome data are handled in RCT-based CEAs, complementing a previous review (covering 2003-2009, 88 articles) with a new systematic review (2009-2015, 81 articles) focussing on two different perspectives. First, we provide guidelines on how the information about missingness and related methods should be presented to improve the reporting and handling of missing data. We propose to address this issue by means of a quality evaluation scheme, providing a structured approach that can be used to guide the collection of information, elicitation of the assumptions, choice of methods and considerations of possible limitations of the given missingness problem. Second, we review the description of the missing data, the statistical methods used to deal with them and the quality of the judgement underpinning the choice of these methods. Our review shows that missing data in within-RCT CEAs are still often inadequately handled and the overall level of information provided to support the chosen methods is rarely satisfactory.
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.