Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29468944›Full record

ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2019

Estimating cost-effectiveness from claims and registry data with measured and unmeasured confounders.

Elizabeth A Handorf, Daniel F Heitjan, Justin E Bekelman, Nandita Mitra

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A Tutorial on Net Benefit Regression for Real-World Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Using Censored Data from Randomized or Observational Studies.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Elizabeth A Handorf1 Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0445-8978
Daniel F Heitjan2 Southern Methodist University and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Justin E Bekelman3 Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Nandita Mitra4 University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
University of Pennsylvania · USFox Chase Cancer Center · USSouthern Methodist University · US

Funding

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA CAN CTR SUPPORT GRANTP30CA016520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Robert H. Vonderheide · 1985 to 2026
$222.3M
WORD PROCESSING CENTER--COREP30CA006927 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI Dietmar J Kappes · 1985 to 2026
$138.8M
Physician Scientist Training in Clinical OncologyK12CA076931 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI STEPHEN Patrick HUNGER, LYNN M. SCHUCHTER · 1997 to 2026
$16.5M
Cancer Biostatistics Training GrantT32CA093283 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI GIMOTTY, PHYLLIS A. · 2003 to 2012
$1.7M
Effectiveness of Radiotherapy for Prostate CancerK07CA163616 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BEKELMAN, JUSTIN · 2012 to 2016
$875k
NCI NIH HHS K07 CA163616NCI NIH HHS K12 CA076931NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006927NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016520NCI NIH HHS T32 CA093283
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The analysis of observational data to determine the cost-effectiveness of medical treatments is complicated by the need to account for skewness, censoring, and the effects of measured and unmeasured confounders. We quantify cost-effectiveness as the Net Monetary Benefit (NMB), a linear combination of the treatment effects on cost and effectiveness that denominates utility in monetary terms. We propose a parametric estimation approach that describes cost with a Gamma generalized linear model and survival time (the canonical effectiveness variable) with a Weibull accelerated failure time model. To account for correlation between cost and survival, we propose a bootstrap procedure to compute confidence intervals for NMB. To examine sensitivity to unmeasured confounders, we derive simple approximate relationships between naïve parameters, assuming only measured confounders, and the values those parameters would take if there was further adjustment for a single unmeasured confounder with a specified distribution. A simulation study shows that the method returns accurate estimates for treatment effects on cost, survival, and NMB under the assumed model. We apply our method to compare two treatments for Stage II/III bladder cancer, concluding that the NMB is sensitive to hypothesized unmeasured confounders that represent smoking status and personal income.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisLinear ModelsHumansIncomeRegistriesSmokingSurvival AnalysisUrinary Bladder Neoplasmscost-effectiveness analysisEconomic analysisobservational studiessensitivity analysisunmeasured confounding

Identifiers

PMID29468944
PMCPMC7673459
OpenAlexW2790012791

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.