𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

Bootstrap confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios: some simulation results

✍ Scribed by Magnus Tambour; Niklas Zethraeus


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
1998
Tongue
English
Weight
62 KB
Volume
7
Category
Article
ISSN
1057-9230

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis


Recently, a number of papers have brought up the issue of how to make cost-effectiveness (CE) studies stochastic, i.e. how to obtain confidence intervals for CE ratios. In this note we present a bootstrap procedure for estimating bias-corrected confidence intervals for CE ratios. The bootstrap procedure is tested in a simulation study based on the assumptions made in a recent paper by Wakker and Klaassen in this journal. We test two variants of CE ratio bootstrap confidence intervals. The first is a bootstrap analogue of the parametric method proposed by Wakker and Klaassen which gives results similar to those obtained with the parametric method. However, computing bootstrap confidence intervals directly for the CE ratio produce results closer to the predetermined significance level.


πŸ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Confidence Intervals for Cost–Effectiven
✍ Daniel Polsky; Henry A. Glick; Richard Willke; Kevin Schulman πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1997 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 90 KB πŸ‘ 2 views

We evaluated four methods for computing confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios developed from randomized controlled trials: the box method, the Taylor series method, the nonparametric bootstrap method and the Fieller theorem method. We performed a Monte Carlo experiment to compare these

Constructing confidence intervals for co
✍ Andrew H. Briggs; Christopher Z. Mooney; David E. Wonderling πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1999 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 176 KB πŸ‘ 2 views

The statistic of interest in most health economic evaluations is the incremental cost-e!ectiveness ratio. Since the variance of a ratio estimator is intractable, the health economics literature has suggested a number of alternative approaches to estimating con"dence intervals for the cost-e!ectivene