Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35368119›Full record

ArticleHealth economics2022

Linear mixed models to handle missing at random data in trial-based economic evaluations.

Andrea Gabrio, Catrin Plumpton, Sube Banerjee, Baptiste Leurent

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 88 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
88citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
25.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

88 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 113 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. CanRestoreFunction: Cancer-related fatigue management eHealth intervention- a pilot pragmatic randomized-control trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Cardiac Biomarkers, Subclinical Brain Vascular Changes, and Cognitive Decline: Post Hoc Analysis of the SPRINT Trial.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2025
    Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Health-related quality of life among older adults following acute hospitalization: longitudinal analysis of a randomized controlled trial.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Review
  20. Article

28 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Andrea GabrioDepartment of Methodology and Statistics, Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Science, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7650-4534
Catrin PlumptonCentre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2710-9199
Sube BanerjeeFaculty of Health, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8083-7649
Baptiste LeurentDepartment of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6420-6567
Bangor University · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMaastricht University · NLUniversity of Plymouth · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R010161/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Trial-based cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) are an important source of evidence in the assessment of health interventions. In these studies, cost and effectiveness outcomes are commonly measured at multiple time points, but some observations may be missing. Restricting the analysis to the participants with complete data can lead to biased and inefficient estimates. Methods, such as multiple imputation, have been recommended as they make better use of the data available and are valid under less restrictive Missing At Random (MAR) assumption. Linear mixed effects models (LMMs) offer a simple alternative to handle missing data under MAR without requiring imputations, and have not been very well explored in the CEA context. In this manuscript, we aim to familiarize readers with LMMs and demonstrate their implementation in CEA. We illustrate the approach on a randomized trial of antidepressants, and provide the implementation code in R and Stata. We hope that the more familiar statistical framework associated with LMMs, compared to other missing data approaches, will encourage their implementation and move practitioners away from inadequate methods.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalCost-Benefit AnalysisDatabases, FactualData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansLinear Modelscost-effectiveness analysismissing datamixed-effectsrandomized trialrepeated measures model

Identifiers

PMID35368119
PMCPMC9325521
OpenAlexW4225577030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.