In reports of economic evaluations alongside clinical trials, we present:

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

When presenting economic evaluations alongside clinical trials, several elements are typically shown to convey both the economic impact and the associated uncertainty.

Option a: 'Mean costs and effects across all study participants.' This approach aggregates data over all participants, which can mask heterogeneity between arms and may not reflect the comparative nature of an economic evaluation. In many trial-based economic evaluations, reporting is tailored to the comparison of interest (e.g., between study arms) and includes measures of uncertainty, rather than a single overall mean that mixes groups. Thus, while descriptive summaries of costs and effects by group are common, this option by itself lacks the explicit comparative framing and uncertainty characterization that guideline-consistent reports emphasize.

Option b: 'Individual costs and effects of each patient.' Reporting costs and effects at the individual patient level can be informative for certain analyses, but economic evaluations alongside trials typically emphasize aggregate measures and differences between arms to support decision-making. Presenting only individual-level results can obscure the overall comparative value and complicate summarization for decision thresholds. Therefore, this option is not the standard primary reporting focus in trials-based economic evaluations, though patient-level data may be used in secondary analyses.

Option c: 'Summary cost-effectiveness measure/s and their uncertainty.' This aligns with best practices: economic evaluations report summary measures (e.g., incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, net benefit) that synthesize costs and effects into a decision-relevant metric, along with uncertainty (confidence intervals, CEACs, etc.). Such summaries support interpretation under uncertainty and are central to interpreting value for money in trials-based economic analyses.

Option d: 'Incremental mean cost differences and mean effect differences between study arms and their standard errors.' This option describes the core comparative outputs: the incremental differences in costs and effects between arms, with associated measures of precision (standard errors, or confidence intervals). This directly reflects the comparative nature of economic evaluations alongside trials and provides the necessary information to assess value for money and uncertainty around the estimates.

In summary, options that emphasize the comparative, aggregated, and uncertainty-informed reporting (c and d) are aligned with conventional practices for economic evaluations conducted alongside clinical trials. The other options describe approaches that are less typical as primary reporting formats for economic evaluations in this context, though they may appear as supplementary or exploratory analyses in broader reports.

GBSH0024_25-26 Quiz for week 5

In reports of economic evaluations alongside clinical trials, we present:

查看解析

登录即可查看完整答案

类似问题

In economic evaluations alongside randomised clinical trials:

An economic evaluation alongside a clinical trial can produce misleading cost-effectiveness estimate of the intervention if:

Which of the following statements about cost effectiveness analysis is true? Cost-effectiveness analysis:

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

A product has a selling price of $20, a contribution margin ratio of 40% and fixed cost of $120,000. To make a profit of $30,000. The number of units that must be sold is: Type the number without $ and a comma. Eg: 20000

Which of the following statement regarding cost is correct:

更多留学生实用工具

考试浏览器助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单