IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v2y1993i3p205-212.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clinical importance, statistical significance and the assessment of economic and quality‐of‐life outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Drummond
  • Bernie O'Brienm

Abstract

The assessment of economic and quality‐of‐life outcomes of health care interventions is moving into a new era, with such assessments increasingly being made within the context of controlled clinical trials. Traditionally the measurement of many variables in economic evaluations, particularly costs, has been deterministic. In the context of clinical trials the measurement of variables is stochastic, with the standard principles of statistical inference being applied to analyse differences between treatments in terms of effectiveness. Economists participating in clinical research are therefore being called upon to specify the sample size for the economic component of the evaluation and to undertake statistical tests for differences in cost or cost‐effectiveness. This paper discusses the current methodological issues surrounding stochastic measurement in clinical trials, discusses the additional issues raised by the assessment of economic and quality‐of‐life outcomes and specifies the challenges facing economists if they are to answer the questions now being posed about economic analysis by statisticians and clinical researchers. It is concluded that application of the standard principles of statistical inference to economic data is not straightforward and will require value judgements to be made about statistical significance and economic importance, which may differ from those already made in purely clinical studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Drummond & Bernie O'Brienm, 1993. "Clinical importance, statistical significance and the assessment of economic and quality‐of‐life outcomes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 2(3), pages 205-212, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:2:y:1993:i:3:p:205-212
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.4730020303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4730020303
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hec.4730020303?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maynard, Alan, 1991. "Developing the Health Care Market," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(408), pages 1277-1286, September.
    2. Drummond, Michael F. & Davies, Linda M. & Ferris, Frederick L., 1992. "Assessing the costs and benefits of medical research: The diabetic retinopathy study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 973-981, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Manuel Gomes & Richard Grieve & Richard Nixon & W. J. Edmunds, 2012. "Statistical Methods for Cost-Effectiveness Analyses That Use Data from Cluster Randomized Trials," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(1), pages 209-220, January.
    2. Maureen P. M. H. Rutten‐van Mölken & Eddy K. A. Van & René C. J. A. van Vliet, 1994. "Statistical analysis of cost outcomes in a randomized controlled clinical trial," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 3(5), pages 333-345, September.
    3. Magnus Tambour & Niklas Zethraeus, 1998. "Bootstrap confidence intervals for cost‐effectiveness ratios: some simulation results," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(2), pages 143-147, March.
    4. Anthony O’Hagan & John Stevens & Jacques Montmartin, 2000. "Inference for the Cost-Effectiveness Acceptability Curve and Cost-Effectiveness Ratio," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 339-349, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rachael L. Fleurence, 2007. "Setting priorities for research: a practical application of 'payback' and expected value of information," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(12), pages 1345-1357.
    2. Isabella Bonacci & Andrea Mazzitelli & Donato Morea, 2020. "Evaluating Climate between Working Excellence and Organizational Innovation: What Comes First?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-29, April.
    3. Karen Gerard & Gavin Mooney, 1993. "Qaly league tables: Handle with care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 2(1), pages 59-64, April.
    4. Elisabeth Fenwick & Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher, 2008. "The Value of Implementation and the Value of Information: Combined and Uneven Development," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(1), pages 21-32, January.
    5. Fleurence, Rachael L. & Torgerson, David J., 2004. "Setting priorities for research," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 1-10, July.
    6. Kobelt, G., 2013. "Health Economics: An Introduction to Economic Evaluation," Monographs, Office of Health Economics, number 000004.
    7. Joanna Thorn & Joanna Coast & Lazaros Andronis, 2016. "Interpretation of the Expected Value of Perfect Information and Research Recommendations," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(3), pages 285-295, April.
    8. David Cohen & Mirella F Longo & John Williams & Wai‐yee Cheung & Hayley Hutchings & I.T. Russell, 2003. "Estimating the marginal value of ‘better’ research output: ‘designed’ versus ‘routine’ data in randomised controlled trials," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(11), pages 959-974, November.
    9. Ham, Chris, 1997. "Priority setting in health care: learning from international experience," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 49-66, October.
    10. Lazaros Andronis & Pelham M. Barton, 2016. "Adjusting Estimates of the Expected Value of Information for Implementation," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(3), pages 296-307, April.
    11. Hanlon, G., 1997. "Commercialising the service class and economic restructuring--a response to my critics," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(8), pages 843-855, November.
    12. Robinson, Ray, 1999. "Limits to rationality: economics, economists and priority setting," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1-2), pages 13-26, September.
    13. Milne, Robin G. & Torsney, Ben, 1997. "The Efficiency of Administrative Governance: The Experience of the Pre-reform British National Health Service," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 161-180, April.
    14. Eulàlia Dalmau & Jaume Puig, 1997. "Market structure and hospital efficiency: Evaluating potential effects of deregulation in a national health service," Economics Working Papers 214, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    15. Tønnesen, Philip, 2009. "Smoking cessation: How compelling is the evidence? A review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(Supplemen), pages 15-25, July.
    16. Propper, Carol, 1996. "Market structure and prices: The responses of hospitals in the UK National Health Service to competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 307-335, September.
    17. Sassi, Franco, 2003. "Setting priorities for the evaluation of health interventions: when theory does not meet practice," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 141-154, February.
    18. Hanney, Steve & Mugford, Miranda & Grant, Jonathan & Buxton, Martin, 2005. "Assessing the benefits of health research: lessons from research into the use of antenatal corticosteroids for the prevention of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(5), pages 937-947, March.
    19. Linda Davies & Mike Drummond & Panos Papanikoloau, 1999. "Prioritising investments in health technology assessment: can we assess the potential value for money?," Working Papers 170chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    20. Ágota Szende & Z. Mogyorósy & N. Muszbek & J. Nagy & G. Pallos & C Dözsa, 2002. "Methodological guidelines for conducting economic evaluation of healthcare interventions in Hungary: a Hungarian proposal for methodology standards," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 3(3), pages 196-206, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:2:y:1993:i:3:p:205-212. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.