ArticlePharmacoEconomics2022
Factors Limiting Subgroup Analysis in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis and a Call for Transparency.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Availability of published evidence on coverage, cost components, and funding support for digitalisation of infectious disease surveillance in Africa, 2003-2022: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of physical activity interventions for people with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder: systematic review.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2023Pooled it
- Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of a real-time screening strategy for bacterial vaginosis using qPCR to prevent preterm birth: results from a randomized prospective multicenter study.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- Accuracy of Budget Impact Projections in Bulgarian Health Technology Assessment: A Five-Year Validation Study (2020-2025).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- An economic evaluation of universal and targeted case-finding strategies for identifying antenatal depression: a model-based analysis comparing common case-finding instruments.Archives of women's mental health · 2025Article
- A Review of Heterogeneity in Comparative Economic Analysis, with Specific Considerations for the Decentralized US Setting and Patient-Centered Care.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Review
- Using Genomic Heterogeneity to Inform Therapeutic Decisions for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An Application of the Value of Heterogeneity Framework.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Article
- Value is Gendered: The Need for Sex and Gender Considerations in Health Economic Evaluations.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Article
- Advances in Addressing Patient Heterogeneity in Economic Evaluation: A Review of the Methods Literature.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Review
- Economic Evaluation of a Personalized Nutrition Plan Based on Omic Sciences Versus a General Nutrition Plan in Adults with Overweight and Obesity: A Modeling Study Based on Trial Data in Denmark.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2024Article
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 use of population averages in cost-effectiveness analysis may hide important differences across subgroups, potentially resulting in suboptimal resource allocation, reduced population health and/or increased health inequalities. We discuss the factors that limit subgroup analysis in cost-effectiveness analysis and propose more thorough and transparent reporting. There are many issues that may limit whether subgroup analysis can be robustly included in cost-effectiveness analysis, including challenges with prespecifying and justifying subgroup analysis, identifying subgroups that can be implemented (identified and targeted) in practice, resource and data requirements, and statistical and ethical concerns. These affect every stage of the design, development and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses. It may not always be possible to include and report relevant subgroups in cost effectiveness, e.g. due to data limitations. Reasons for not conducting subgroup analysis may be heterogeneous, and the consequences of not acknowledging patient heterogeneity can be substantial. We recommend that when potentially relevant subgroups have not been included in a cost-effectiveness analysis, authors report this and discuss their rationale and the limitations of this. Greater transparency of subgroup reporting should provide a starting point to overcoming these challenges in future research.
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.