Cargando…
Is the whole larger than the sum of its parts? Impact of missing data imputation in economic evaluation conducted alongside randomized controlled trials
Outcomes in economic evaluations, such as health utilities and costs, are products of multiple variables, often requiring complete item responses to questionnaires. Therefore, missing data are very common in cost-effectiveness analyses. Multiple imputations (MI) are predominately recommended and cou...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7366573/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32108274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10198-020-01166-z |
_version_ | 1783560247048142848 |
---|---|
author | Michalowsky, Bernhard Hoffmann, Wolfgang Kennedy, Kevin Xie, Feng |
author_facet | Michalowsky, Bernhard Hoffmann, Wolfgang Kennedy, Kevin Xie, Feng |
author_sort | Michalowsky, Bernhard |
collection | PubMed |
description | Outcomes in economic evaluations, such as health utilities and costs, are products of multiple variables, often requiring complete item responses to questionnaires. Therefore, missing data are very common in cost-effectiveness analyses. Multiple imputations (MI) are predominately recommended and could be made either for individual items or at the aggregate level. We, therefore, aimed to assess the precision of both MI approaches (the item imputation vs. aggregate imputation) on the cost-effectiveness results. The original data set came from a cluster-randomized, controlled trial and was used to describe the missing data pattern and compare the differences in the cost-effectiveness results between the two imputation approaches. A simulation study with different missing data scenarios generated based on a complete data set was used to assess the precision of both imputation approaches. For health utility and cost, patients more often had a partial (9% vs. 23%, respectively) rather than complete missing (4% vs. 0%). The imputation approaches differed in the cost-effectiveness results (the item imputation: − 61,079€/QALY vs. the aggregate imputation: 15,399€/QALY). Within the simulation study mean relative bias (< 5% vs. < 10%) and range of bias (< 38% vs. < 83%) to the true incremental cost and incremental QALYs were lower for the item imputation compared to the aggregate imputation. Even when 40% of data were missing, relative bias to true cost-effectiveness curves was less than 16% using the item imputation, but up to 39% for the aggregate imputation. Thus, the imputation strategies could have a significant impact on the cost-effectiveness conclusions when more than 20% of data are missing. The item imputation approach has better precision than the imputation at the aggregate level. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10198-020-01166-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7366573 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73665732020-07-21 Is the whole larger than the sum of its parts? Impact of missing data imputation in economic evaluation conducted alongside randomized controlled trials Michalowsky, Bernhard Hoffmann, Wolfgang Kennedy, Kevin Xie, Feng Eur J Health Econ Original Paper Outcomes in economic evaluations, such as health utilities and costs, are products of multiple variables, often requiring complete item responses to questionnaires. Therefore, missing data are very common in cost-effectiveness analyses. Multiple imputations (MI) are predominately recommended and could be made either for individual items or at the aggregate level. We, therefore, aimed to assess the precision of both MI approaches (the item imputation vs. aggregate imputation) on the cost-effectiveness results. The original data set came from a cluster-randomized, controlled trial and was used to describe the missing data pattern and compare the differences in the cost-effectiveness results between the two imputation approaches. A simulation study with different missing data scenarios generated based on a complete data set was used to assess the precision of both imputation approaches. For health utility and cost, patients more often had a partial (9% vs. 23%, respectively) rather than complete missing (4% vs. 0%). The imputation approaches differed in the cost-effectiveness results (the item imputation: − 61,079€/QALY vs. the aggregate imputation: 15,399€/QALY). Within the simulation study mean relative bias (< 5% vs. < 10%) and range of bias (< 38% vs. < 83%) to the true incremental cost and incremental QALYs were lower for the item imputation compared to the aggregate imputation. Even when 40% of data were missing, relative bias to true cost-effectiveness curves was less than 16% using the item imputation, but up to 39% for the aggregate imputation. Thus, the imputation strategies could have a significant impact on the cost-effectiveness conclusions when more than 20% of data are missing. The item imputation approach has better precision than the imputation at the aggregate level. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10198-020-01166-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-02-27 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7366573/ /pubmed/32108274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10198-020-01166-z Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Michalowsky, Bernhard Hoffmann, Wolfgang Kennedy, Kevin Xie, Feng Is the whole larger than the sum of its parts? Impact of missing data imputation in economic evaluation conducted alongside randomized controlled trials |
title | Is the whole larger than the sum of its parts? Impact of missing data imputation in economic evaluation conducted alongside randomized controlled trials |
title_full | Is the whole larger than the sum of its parts? Impact of missing data imputation in economic evaluation conducted alongside randomized controlled trials |
title_fullStr | Is the whole larger than the sum of its parts? Impact of missing data imputation in economic evaluation conducted alongside randomized controlled trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Is the whole larger than the sum of its parts? Impact of missing data imputation in economic evaluation conducted alongside randomized controlled trials |
title_short | Is the whole larger than the sum of its parts? Impact of missing data imputation in economic evaluation conducted alongside randomized controlled trials |
title_sort | is the whole larger than the sum of its parts? impact of missing data imputation in economic evaluation conducted alongside randomized controlled trials |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7366573/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32108274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10198-020-01166-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT michalowskybernhard isthewholelargerthanthesumofitspartsimpactofmissingdataimputationineconomicevaluationconductedalongsiderandomizedcontrolledtrials AT hoffmannwolfgang isthewholelargerthanthesumofitspartsimpactofmissingdataimputationineconomicevaluationconductedalongsiderandomizedcontrolledtrials AT kennedykevin isthewholelargerthanthesumofitspartsimpactofmissingdataimputationineconomicevaluationconductedalongsiderandomizedcontrolledtrials AT xiefeng isthewholelargerthanthesumofitspartsimpactofmissingdataimputationineconomicevaluationconductedalongsiderandomizedcontrolledtrials |