Advertisement

Analyzing Pragmatic Trials to Inform Cost-Effectiveness Analyses

Published:October 29, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.09.2479
      We appreciate the comments raised by Subbaraman et al,

      Subbaraman R, Haberer JE, Fielding K. Intention-to-treat or per-protocol? Overly optimistic findings regarding the cost-effectiveness of 99DOTS, a tuberculosis digital adherence technology [published online October 17, 2022]. Value Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.09.008.

      highlighting valid concerns regarding the use of per-protocol (PP) rather than intention-to-treat (ITT) results in cost-effectiveness analyses. The authors appropriately pointed out that PP analyses are subject to potential selection bias. As such, using results from PP may result in misleading, and often overly optimistic, conclusions regarding the interventions’ cost-effectiveness. We fully agree with this premise. But blind reliance on ITT results is equally dangerous, especially in the context of pragmatic trials,
      • Ford I.
      • Norrie J.
      Pragmatic trials.
      which increasingly—and in our minds, appropriately—play an important role in informing decisions of whether to scale up interventions.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Value in Health
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. Subbaraman R, Haberer JE, Fielding K. Intention-to-treat or per-protocol? Overly optimistic findings regarding the cost-effectiveness of 99DOTS, a tuberculosis digital adherence technology [published online October 17, 2022]. Value Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.09.008.

        • Ford I.
        • Norrie J.
        Pragmatic trials.
        N Engl J Med. 2016; 375: 454-463
        • Revicki D.A.
        • Frank L.
        Pharmacoeconomic evaluation in the real world. Effectiveness. versus efficacy studies.
        Pharmacoeconomics. 1999; 15: 423-434
        • Hernán M.A.
        • Robins J.M.
        Per-protocol analyses of pragmatic trials.
        N Engl J Med. 2017; 377: 1391-1398
        • Hernán M.A.
        • Hernández-Díaz S.
        Beyond the intention-to-treat in comparative effectiveness research.
        Clin Trials. 2012; 9: 48-55
        • Cattamanchi A.
        • Crowder R.
        • Kityamuwesi A.
        • et al.
        Digital adherence technology for tuberculosis treatment supervision: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial in Uganda.
        PLoS Med. 2021; 18e1003628
        • Thompson R.R.
        • Kityamuwesi A.
        • Kuan A.
        • et al.
        Cost and cost-effectiveness of a digital adherence technology for tuberculosis treatment support in Uganda.
        Value Health. 2022; 25: 924-930
        • Sohn H.
        • Tucker A.
        • Ferguson O.
        • Gomes I.
        • Dowdy D.
        Costing the implementation of public health interventions in resource-limited settings: a conceptual framework.
        Implement Sci. 2020; 15: 86
        • Schoenwald S.K.
        • Hoagwood K.
        Effectiveness, transportability, and dissemination of interventions: what matters when?.
        Psychiatr Serv. 2001; 52: 1190-1197
        • Crowder R.
        • Kityamuwesi A.
        • Kiwanuka N.
        • et al.
        Study protocol and implementation details for a pragmatic, stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial of a digital adherence technology to facilitate tuberculosis treatment completion.
        BMJ Open. 2020; 10e039895