IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v5y1996i6p501-512.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nonsampling measurement error in administrative data: Implications for economic evaluations

Author

Listed:
  • Nancy Wolff
  • Thomas W. Helminiak

Abstract

Administrative databases are increasingly being used to measure resource use in economic evaluations. Traditionally, it is assumed that any measurement error within the resource data source is stochastic and uncorrelated with group assignment. If the error is correlated with characteristics of the service delivery system and/or correlated by group, the estimated differences in consumption between groups may be reflecting errors in measurement rather than treatment effects. This paper is concerned with the effect of nonsampling measurement error on the internal and external validity of cost estimates based on data drawn from administrative record systems. Two service delivery characteristics, ownership form and financial incentives, are likely to influence systematically an agency's data collection effort. Using data from three community mental health centres located in three different states, evidence of systematic differences in data quality was found; private agencies with reimbursement property rights had higher quality data than public agencies without property rights. Simple tests for detecting variation in service use and costs data and cost‐effective solutions for managing these problems are proposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Nancy Wolff & Thomas W. Helminiak, 1996. "Nonsampling measurement error in administrative data: Implications for economic evaluations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(6), pages 501-512, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:5:y:1996:i:6:p:501-512
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199611)5:63.0.CO;2-V
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199611)5:63.0.CO;2-V
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199611)5:63.0.CO;2-V?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. Andrew Briggs & Mark Sculpher & Martin Buxton, 1994. "Uncertainty in the economic evaluation of health care technologies: The role of sensitivity analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 3(2), pages 95-104, March.
    2. Chillemi, Ottorino & Gui, Benedetto, 1991. "Uninformed customers and nonprofit organization : Modelling 'contract failure' theory," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 5-8, January.
    3. James Mason & Michael Drummond, 1995. "Reporting guidelines for economic studies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 4(2), pages 85-94, March.
    4. Andrew Briggs & Mark Sculpher, 1995. "Sensitivity analysis in economic evaluation: A review of published studies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 4(5), pages 355-371, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Trevor A. Sheldon, 1996. "Problems of using modelling in the economic evaluation of health care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(1), pages 1-11, January.
    2. Isaac Corro Ramos & Maureen P. M. H. Rutten-van Mölken & Maiwenn J. Al, 2013. "The Role of Value-of-Information Analysis in a Health Care Research Priority Setting," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(4), pages 472-489, May.
    3. John Hutton, 2012. "‘Health Economics’ and the evolution of economic evaluation of health technologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(1), pages 13-18, January.
    4. K Cooper & S C Brailsford & R Davies, 2007. "Choice of modelling technique for evaluating health care interventions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(2), pages 168-176, February.
    5. Kobelt, G., 2013. "Health Economics: An Introduction to Economic Evaluation," Monographs, Office of Health Economics, number 000004.
    6. Joanne Lord & Maxwell A. Asante, 1999. "Estimating uncertainty ranges for costs by the bootstrap procedure combined with probabilistic sensitivity analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(4), pages 323-333, June.
    7. Alan M. Garber, 1999. "Advances in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Health Interventions," NBER Working Papers 7198, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Mark J. C. Nuijten & Pieter H. A. J. M. Van Gelder, 2011. "A Concise Equation That Captures the Essential Elements of One-Way Sensitivity Analyses in Health Economic Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(4), pages 642-649, July.
    9. Martin J. Buxton & Michael F. Drummond & Ben A. Van Hout & Richard L. Prince & Trevor A. Sheldon & Thomas Szucs & Muriel Vray, 1997. "Modelling in Ecomomic Evaluation: An Unavoidable Fact of Life," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 217-227, May.
    10. Satoshi Shimizutani & Haruko Noguchi, 2005. "Nonprofit and for-profit providers in Japan's at-home care industry: evidence on quality of service and household choice," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 9(3), pages 1-13.
    11. Cho, In Soo, 2012. "Four essays on risk preferences, entrepreneurship, earnings, occupations, and gender," ISU General Staff Papers 201201010800003883, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Cho, In Soo & Orazem, Peter, 2013. "Are Nonprofit Entrepreneurs Also "Jacks-Of-All-Trades"?," Staff General Research Papers Archive 35750, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    13. David J. Vanness & W. Ray Kim, 2002. "Bayesian estimation, simulation and uncertainty analysis: the cost‐effectiveness of ganciclovir prophylaxis in liver transplantation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 551-566, September.
    14. Gianluca Baio & Laura Magazzini & Claudia Oglialoro & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni, 2005. "Medical Devices: Competitiveness and Impact on Public Health Expenditure," Working Papers CERM 05-2005, Competitività, Regole, Mercati (CERM).
    15. Mark Schreiner, 2001. "Evaluation and Microenterprise Programs," Development and Comp Systems 0108002, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 27 Dec 2001.
    16. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:9:y:2005:i:3:p:1-13 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Berger, Loïc & Bleichrodt, Han & Eeckhoudt, Louis, 2013. "Treatment decisions under ambiguity," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 559-569.
    18. Hiller, Maximilian & Leisen, Bernd Josef & Mertins, Vanessa, 2024. "Pro-social mission and honesty – an artefactual field experiment with fundraising professionals," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 238(C).
    19. Matthew Franklin & James Lomas & Simon Walker & Tracey Young, 2019. "An Educational Review About Using Cost Data for the Purpose of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 631-643, May.
    20. Kaan Sözmen & Belgin Unal & Simon Capewell & Julia Critchley & Martin O’Flaherty, 2015. "Estimating diabetes prevalence in Turkey in 2025 with and without possible interventions to reduce obesity and smoking prevalence, using a modelling approach," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 60(1), pages 13-21, January.
    21. Sebastian Gurtner, 2013. "An analysis of the influence of framework aspects on the study design of health economic modeling evaluations," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(2), pages 221-230, April.

    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:5:y:1996:i:6:p:501-512. 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.