On the probability of cost-effectiveness using data from randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND: Acceptability curves have been proposed for quantifying the probability that a treatment under investigation in a clinical trial is cost-effective. Various definitions and estimation methods have been proposed. Loosely speaking, all the definitions, Bayesian or otherwise, relate to the probability that the treatment under consideration is cost-effective as a function of the value placed on a unit of effectiveness. These definitions are, in fact, expressions of the certainty with which the current evidence would lead us to believe that the treatment under consideration is cost-effective, and are dependent on the amount of evidence (i.e. sample size). METHODS: An alternative for quantifying the probability that the treatment under consideration is cost-effective, which is independent of sample size, is proposed. RESULTS: Non-parametric methods are given for point and interval estimation. In addition, these methods provide a non-parametric estimator and confidence interval for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. An example is provided. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed parameter for quantifying the probability that a new therapy is cost-effective is superior to the acceptability curve because it is not sample size dependent and because it can be interpreted as the proportion of patients who would benefit if given the new therapy. Non-parametric methods are used to estimate the parameter and its variance, providing the appropriate confidence intervals and test of hypothesis

Using the Incremental Net Benefit Framework for Quantitative Benefit–Risk Analysis in Regulatory Decision-Making—A Case Study of Alosetron in Irritable Bowel Syndrome

AbstractObjectiveThere is consensus that a more transparent, explicit, and rigorous approach to benefit–risk evaluation is required. The objective of this study is to evaluate the incremental net benefit (INB) framework for undertaking quantitative benefit–risk assessment by performing a quantitative benefit–risk analysis of alosetron for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome from the patients’ perspective.MethodsA discrete event simulation model was developed to determine the INB of alosetron relative to placebo, calculated as “relative value-adjusted life-years (RVALYs).”ResultsIn the base case analysis, alosetron resulted in a mean INB of 34.1 RVALYs per 1000 patients treated relative to placebo over 52 weeks of treatment. Incorporating parameter uncertainty into the model, probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed a mean INB of 30.4 (95% confidence interval 15.9–45.4) RVALYs per 1000 patients treated relative to placebo over 52 weeks of treatment. Overall, there was >99% chance that both the incremental benefit and incremental risk associated with alosetron are greater than placebo. As hypothesized, the INB of alosetron was greatest in patients with the worst quality of life experienced at baseline. The mean INB associated with alosetron in patients with mild, moderate, and severe symptoms at baseline was 17.97 (−0.55 to 36.23), 29.98 (17.05–43.37), and 35.98 (23.49–48.77) RVALYs per 1000 patients treated, respectively.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the potential utility of applying the INB framework to real-life decision-making, and the ability to use simulation modeling incorporating outcomes data from different sources as a benefit–risk decision aid

Effect on birth outcomes of a formalised approach to care in hospital labour assessment units: international, randomised controlled trial

Objective To determine if a complex nursing and midwifery intervention in hospital labour assessment units would increase the likelihood of spontaneous vaginal birth and improve other maternal and neonatal outcomes

The African Women's Protocol: Bringing Attention to Reproductive Rights and the MDGs

Andrew Gibbs and colleagues discuss the African Women's Protocol, a framework for ensuring reproductive rights are supported throughout the continent and for supporting interventions to improve women's reproductive health, including the MDGs

Change in emotional distress, anxiety, depression and PTSD from pre- to post-flood exposure in women residing in low-income settings in South Africa

This is the final version. Available on open access from Springer via the DOI in this recordData availability: The data used in this paper are available on request to the corresponding author.Floods are increasing in frequency and may increase the risk for experiencing emotional distress, anxiety, depression and PTSD. The aim of this study was to determine the extent of damage, loss, injury and death resulting from floods that occurred in and around the city of Durban, South Africa, in April 2022, and associated changes in mental health pre- to post-floods in a low-income setting. Seventy-three women between the ages of 18 and 45, residing in flood affected, low-income settings, were interviewed prior to the floods occurring. Mental health measures were repeated with 69 of the 73 women during the post-flood interview along with a questionnaire measuring flood-related exposures. Loss of infrastructure (lacked access to drinking water, electricity, fresh food, could not travel to work, had to stay in a shelter and could not get hold of friends or family) was a predictor of post-flood change in levels of emotional distress and anxiety. Higher levels of prior trauma exposure were associated with higher post-flood levels of emotional distress. Higher pre-flood food insecurity was also associated with higher post-flood anxiety. Women affected by poverty, food insecurity and a history of trauma are vulnerable to the additive adverse mental health effects of floods. Proactive approaches to diminishing the impact of floods on the livelihood of women is needed and post-flood relieve efforts may be more affective if they are enhanced by providing mental health support.South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC)Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF

Maternal outcomes at 3 months after planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for twin pregnancies in the Twin Birth Study: a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes at 3 months post partum for women randomised to give birth by planned caesarean section (CS) or by planned vaginal birth (VB) in the Twin Birth Study (TBS). DESIGN: We invited women in the TBS to complete a 3-month follow-up questionnaire. SETTING: Two thousand and eight hundred and four women from 25 countries. POPULATION: Two thousand and five hundred and seventy women (92% response rate). METHODS: Women randomised between 13 December 2003 and 4 April 2011 in the TBS completed a questionnaire and outcomes were compared using an intention-to-treat approach. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: Breastfeeding, quality of life, depression, fatigue and urinary incontinence. RESULTS: We found no clinically important differences between groups in any outcome. In the planned CS versus planned VB groups, breastfeeding at any time after birth was reported by 84.4% versus 86.4% (P = 0.13); the mean physical and mental Short Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36) quality of life scores were 51.8 versus 51.6 (P = 0.65) and 46.7 versus 46.0 (P = 0.09), respectively; the mean Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue score was 20.3 versus 20.8 (P = 0.14); the frequency of probable depression on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale was 14.0% versus 14.8% (P = 0.57); the rate of problematic urinary incontinence was 5.5% versus 6.4% (P = 0.31); and the mean Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 score was 20.5 versus 20.4 (P = 0.99). Partner relationships, including painful intercourse, were similar between the groups. CONCLUSION: For women with twin pregnancies randomised to planned CS compared with planned VB, outcomes at 3 months post partum did not differ. The mode of birth was not associated with problematic urinary incontinence or urinary incontinence that affected the quality of life. Contrary to previous studies, breastfeeding at 3 months was not increased with planned VB. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Planned mode of birth for twins doesn't affect maternal depression, wellbeing, incontinence or breastfeeding