Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 1998 Oct 31;317(7167):1195-200.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7167.1195.

Analysis and interpretation of cost data in randomised controlled trials: review of published studies

J A Barber  1 , S G Thompson
Affiliations
Review

Analysis and interpretation of cost data in randomised controlled trials: review of published studies

J A Barber et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To review critically the statistical methods used for health economic evaluations in randomised controlled trials where an estimate of cost is available for each patient in the study.

Design: Survey of published randomised trials including an economic evaluation with cost values suitable for statistical analysis; 45 such trials published in 1995 were identified from Medline.

Main outcome measures: The use of statistical methods for cost data was assessed in terms of the descriptive statistics reported, use of statistical inference, and whether the reported conclusions were justified.

Results: Although all 45 trials reviewed apparently had cost data for each patient, only 9 (20%) reported adequate measures of variability for these data and only 25 (56%) gave results of statistical tests or a measure of precision for the comparison of costs between the randomised groups. Only 16 (36%) of the articles gave conclusions which were justified on the basis of results presented in the paper. No paper reported sample size calculations for costs.

Conclusions: The analysis and interpretation of cost data from published trials reveal a lack of statistical awareness. Strong and potentially misleading conclusions about the relative costs of alternative therapies have often been reported in the absence of supporting statistical evidence. Improvements in the analysis and reporting of health economic assessments are urgently required. Health economic guidelines need to be revised to incorporate more detailed statistical advice.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure
Figure
Proportion of 45 papers reporting descriptive statistics and inferential statistics for costs. Statistical tests were t test or analysis of variance (parametric); Mann-Whitney U test or Kruskal-Wallis test (non-parametric); 2 regression, 4 unspecified (“other”). SD=standard deviation; SE=standard error; CI=confidence interval
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Bradford Hill A. Observation and experiment. N Engl J Med. 1953;248:995–1001. - PubMed
    1. Drummond MF, Stoddart GL. Economic analysis and clinical trials. Controlled Clin Trials. 1984;5:115–128. - PubMed
    1. Drummond MF, Davies L. Economic analysis alongside clinical trials. Revisiting the methodological issues. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1991;7:561–573. - PubMed
    1. Thompson SG, Barber JA. From efficacy to cost-effectiveness. Lancet. 1998;350:1781. - PubMed
    1. Adams ME, McCall NT, Gray DT, Orza MJ, Chalmers TC. Economic analysis in randomized control trials. Med Care. 1992;30:231–243. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms