Summary
The level of uncertainty with regard to the outcomes of pharmacoeconomic studies cannot be completely covered by the statistical methods routinely employed to handle uncertainty in clinical research. Sensitivity analysis is the most common methodology to deal with the extra uncertainty associated with phar-macoeconomics, and has also been incorporated in recent guidelines on healthcare evaluation. However, the execution of a sensitivity analysis and the interpretation of its results have not yet been standardised, which may lead to subjectivity and consequently weaken the value of economic evaluations. This article presents a method of dealing more systematically with uncertainty and eliminating potential bias in sensitivity analysis, with regard to the measurement of sensitivity and the comparison of the degree of sensitivity between variables. An assessment of the disadvantages of using slope as a measure of sensitivity leads to 2 types of sensitivity analyses (point-sensitivity and range-sensitivity), which are integrated into one method for the measurement of sensitivity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Australian Commonwealth Department of Health, Housing and Community Services. Guidelines for the pharmaceutical industry on preparation of submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Canberra: Commonwealth Department, 1992
Detsky AS. Guidelines for economic analysis of pharmaceutical products: a draft document for Ontario and Canada. Pharmacoeconomics 1993; 3: 345–361
Udvarhelyi S, Colditz GA, Epstein AM. Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses in the medical literature: are the methods being used correctly? Ann Intern Med 1992; 116: 238–244
Task Force on Principles for Economic Analysis of Health Care Technology. Economic analysis of health care technology: a report on principles. Ann Intern Med 1995; 122: 61–70
Briggs A. Handling uncertainty in the results of economic evaluation. OHE Briefing No. 23. London: 1995
Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment. Guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: Canada, 1st ed. Ottawa: CCOHTA, 1994
Torrance GW, Blaker D, Detsky A, et al. Canadian guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 9 (6): 535–559
Critchfield GC, Willard KE, Connelly DP. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis methods for general decision models. Comput Biomed Res 1986; 19: 254–265
Weinstein MC, Fineberg HV. Clinical decision analysis. Philadelphia (PA): WB Saunders Co., 1980: 228–265
Nuijten MJC, Hardens M, Souetre E. A Markov process analysis comparing the cost effectiveness of maintenance therapy with citalopram versus standard therapy in major depression. Pharmacoeconomics 1995; 8 (2): 159–168
Lipsey R, Steiner P, Purvis D, et al. Economics. 9th ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1990
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nuijten, M.J.C., Hardens, M. Measuring Sensitivity in Pharmacoeconomic Studies. Pharmacoeconomics 12, 555–564 (1997). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199712050-00006
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199712050-00006