Skip to main content

Optimizing the Cost-Effectiveness of a Multicomponent Intervention Using Data from a Factorial Experiment: Considerations, Open Questions, and Tradeoffs Among Multiple Outcomes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Statistics for Social and Behavioral Sciences ((SSBS))

Abstract

Cost-effectiveness—increasing the benefit obtained for a given expenditure of time or money—is an important idea in many applied research fields. It is one important quality that a researcher interested in the multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) may wish to optimize. However, further research is needed about how to best incorporate cost information into the analysis of factorial experiments typically used during the optimization phase of MOST. This chapter will review the issues involved in making cost-effectiveness judgments using the results of factorial experiments and explore some possibilities for further methodological research on how best to estimate and compare cost-effectiveness using the results of factorial experiments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Weight loss is actually a change score (value after minus value before). Change scores are not the only way to measure change from baseline. It has been argued that it is more statistically efficient to model posttreatment outcome adjusted for pretreatment status as a covariate, rather than using change scores directly (see, e.g., Vickers, 2001; Vickers & Altman, 2001). However, weight loss in kilograms is the simplest choice here and therefore the best choice for illustrative purposes.

  2. 2.

    This chapter will use the term “dominate” in a somewhat informal way. The economics literature sometimes distinguishes between strong and weak dominance. Option A is said to strongly dominate Option B if A is both less costly and more effective. Option A is sometimes said to weakly dominate Option B if A is either equally costly but more effective or less costly but equally effective. This is not a large distinction for our purposes, first because it is unlikely that two treatments would have exactly the same cost or exactly the same benefit (Drummond et al., 2005) and second because it does not necessarily change the implied decision. The term weak dominance is also sometimes used when Option A delivers more effectiveness per unit cost than Option B (Gift et al., 2003). However, this kind of “dominance” does not necessarily imply that Option A is better in every sense, as Option B might still have less total cost or more total effectiveness. Therefore, the sense of the term “dominance” in this chapter is essentially that of strong dominance.

  3. 3.

    In practice the farm or factory owner might use a weight other than one; for example, they might discount (proportionally reduce) E, in order to reflect time delay in production and uncertainties in sales (see Harrington, 1981; Petrou & Gray, 2011). However, the basic intuition still applies: convert a gross gain to a net gain by subtracting off some measure of cost. This kind of discounting of future predictions can also be done in cost-benefit analysis in promoting human health. The discounted benefits minus discounted cost (essentially, E-λC) is therefore called the “net present value” of an intervention (see Messonier & Meltzer, 2003). In the weight loss example, if a particular λ is used to convert kilogram units into money units, and the decision-maker is trying to find out how much money to spend on weight loss versus other priorities, then cost-benefit analysis is being done, rather than cost-effectiveness analysis. The focus of this chapter is on cost-effectiveness rather than cost-benefit analysis, so the question of how to choose λ is beyond the scope of this chapter.

  4. 4.

    One alternative could be to consider two conditions at a time and compute a confidence interval for the ICER, or for the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve at a given λ, for each of these pairwise comparisons. Another alternative would be to designate a control condition and compare every other condition with that one only. Furthermore, if one is using a Bayesian approach with posterior probabilities, one could calculate, for each candidate intervention, either its posterior probability of being having the best utility measure λE-C among the conditions available, or its posterior probability of having a utility measure above some threshold.

  5. 5.

    As a caveat, if it were known in advance that only three of the four conditions were of interest, then an incomplete factorial comparing only those three conditions might be more appropriate than a complete 2 × 2 factorial (see Collins et al., 2009 for advantages and disadvantages of incomplete designs). However, if, say, only four out of six components could affordably be implemented at a time in practice, there are still many affordable conditions, so a complete or fractional factorial experiment might still be appropriate. As another caveat, the challenge of creating special programs for resource-poor settings has raised important debates about equity and disparities which are beyond the scope of this chapter; for example, consider the criticism by Kozol (2005) and defense in Slavin (2006) of the use of a particular program for disadvantaged schools.

References

  • American Medical Association Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs. (1995). Ethical considerations in the allocation of organs and other scarce medical resources among patients. Archives of Internal Medicine, 155, 29–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appelbaum, B. (2011, February 16). As U.S. agencies put more value on a life, businesses fret. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com

  • Bechhofer, R. E., Santner, T. J., & Goldsman, D. M. (1995). Design and analysis of experiments for statistical selection, screening, and multiple comparisons. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belli, P. C., Bustreo, F., & Preker, A. (2005). Investing in children’s health: What are the economic benefits? Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 83, 777–784.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bensink, M. E., Eaton, L. H., Morrison, M. L., Cook, W. A., Curtis, R. R., Kundu, A., … Doorenbos, A. Z. (2013). Cost effectiveness analysis for nursing research. Nursing Research, 64(4), 279–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belsink, M. E., Eaton, L. H., Morrison, M. L., Cook, W. A., Curtis, R. R., Gordon, D. B., Kundu, A., … Doorenbos, A. Z. (2013). Cost effectiveness analysis for nursing research. Nursing Research, 62(4), 279–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bierman, K. L., Henrichs, B. S., Welsh, J. A., Nix, R. L., & Gest, S. D. (2017). Enriching preschool classrooms and home visits with evidence-based programming: Sustained benefits for low-income children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58, 129–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, W. C. (1990). The CE plane: A graphic representation of cost-effectiveness. Medical Decision Making, 10, 212–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, E. H., Canavan, M., Rogan, E., Talbert-Slagle, K., Ndumele, C., Taylor, L., & Curry, L. A. (2016). Variation in health outcomes: The role of spending on social services, public health, and health care, 2000–09. Health Affairs, 35, 760–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. E. (2014, December 15). Forbidden topic in health policy debate: Cost effectiveness. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com

  • Chapman, J. L., Lu, L., & Anderson-Cook, C. M. (2014). Process optimization for multiple responses utilizing the Pareto front approach. Quality Engineering, 26, 253–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatfield, C. (1995). Model uncertainty, data mining and statistical inference. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 158, 419–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C.-H., & Meeter, D. (1999). Empirical Bayes analyses of two-level factorials. FSU Statistics Report M920.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claeskens, G., & Hjort, N. L. (2008). Model selection and model averaging. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Claxton, K. (1999). The irrelevance of inference: A decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. Journal of Health Economics, 18, 341–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claxton, K., Lacey, L. F., & Walker, S. G. (2000). Selecting treatments: A decision theoretic approach. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, A, 163(2), 211–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clegg, A., Scott, D. A., Sidhu, M., Hewitson, P., & Waugh, N. (2001). A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in non-small-cell lung cancer. Health Technology Assessment, 5(32), 1–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, L. M. (2018). Optimization of behavioral, biobehavioral, and biomedical interventions: The multiphase optimization strategy (MOST). New York, NY: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, L. M., Dziak, J. J., & Li, R. (2009). Design of experiments with multiple independent variables: A resource management perspective on complete and reduced factorial designs. Psychological Methods, 14, 202–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, L. M., Kugler, K. C., & Gwadz, M. V. (2016). Optimization of multicomponent behavioral and biobehavioral interventions for the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS. AIDS and Behavior, 20(Supplement 1), S197–S214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, L. M., Trail, J. B., Kugler, K. C., Baker, T. B., Piper, M. E., & Mermelstein, R. J. (2014). Evaluating individual intervention components: Making decisions based on the results of a factorial screening experiment. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 4, 238–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-013-0239-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Courtney, A. E., & Maxwell, A. P. (2009). The challenge of doing what is right in renal transplantation: Balancing equity and utility. Nephron Clinical Practice, 111, c62–c68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, D. R., & Snell, E. J. (1989). Analysis of binary data (2nd ed.). London, UK: Chapman & Hall.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Crowley, D. M., Hill, L. G., Kuklinski, M. R., & Jones, D. E. (2014). Research priorities for economic analyses of prevention: Current issues and future directions. Prevention Science, 15, 789–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowley, M., & Jones, D. (2017). A framework for valuing investments in a nurturing society: Opportunities for prevention research. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 20, 87–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dasbach, E. J., & Teutsch, S. M. (2003). Quality of life. In A. C. Haddix, S. M. Teutsch, & P. S. Corso (Eds.), Prevention effectiveness: A guide to decision analysis and economic evaluation (pp. 77–91). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, D. R., Kisiel, C. C., & Duckstein, L. (1972). Bayesian decision theory applied to design in hydrology. Water Resources Research, 8, 33–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, R. W., & Quinn, G. P. (1989). Comparisons of treatments after an analysis of variance in ecology. Ecological Monographs, 59, 433–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, J. L. (1966). Economic considerations in the design and analysis of agricultural experiments. Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, 34(2), 64–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dong, W., Qin, J., Li, J., Zhao, Y., Nie, L., & Zhang, Z. (2011). Interactions between soil water content and fertilizer on growth characteristics and biomass yield of Chinese white poplar (Populas tomentosa Carr.) seedlings. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 57, 303–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M. J., Torrance, G. W., O’Brien, B. J., & Stoddart, G. L. (2005). Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, K. (2016). Process improvement using data (online textbook). Retrieved from http://learnche.org/pid

  • Eeren, H. V., Schawo, S. J., Scholte, R. H. J., Busschbach, J. J. V., & Hakkaart, L. (2015). Value of information analysis applied to the economic evaluation of interventions aimed at reducing juvenile delinquency: An illustration. PLoS One, 10(7), e0131255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Embry, D. D., & Biglan, A. (2008). Evidence-based kernels: Fundamental units of behavioral influence. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 11, 75–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertefaie, A., Wu, T., Lynch, K., & Nahum-Shani, I. (2015). Identifying a set that contains the best dynamic treatment regimes. Biostatistics, 17(1), 135–148.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Fenwick, E., O’Brien, B. J., & Briggs, A. (2004). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves - facts, fallacies and frequently asked questions. Health Economics, 13(5), 405–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, N. R., Colagiuri, S., Schofield, D., Olseon, A. D., Shrestha, R., Holzapfel, C., … Caterson, I. D. (2013). A within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis of primary care referral to a commercial provider for weight loss treatment, relative to standard care – An international randomised controlled trial. International Journal of Obesity, 37, 828–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garber, A. M., & Tunis, S. R. (2009). Does comparative-effectiveness research threaten personalized medicine? New England Journal of Medicine, 360, 1925–1927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gift, T. L., Haddix, A. C., & Corso, P. S. (2003). Cost-effectiveness analysis. In A. C. Haddix, S. M. Teutsch, & P. S. Corso (Eds.), Prevention effectiveness: A guide to decision analysis and economic evaluation (pp. 156–177). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, S. S., & Hsu, J. C. (1978). Subset selection procedures with special reference to the analysis of two-way layout: Application to motor-vehicle fatality data. SIGSIM Simulation Digest, 10, 68–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyll, M., Spoth, R., & Crowley, D. M. (2011). Economic analysis of methamphetamine prevention effects and employer costs. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 72(4), 577–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haddix, A. C., Corso, P. S., & Gorsky, R. D. (2003). Costs. In A. C. Haddix, S. M. Teutsch, & P. S. Corso (Eds.), Prevention effectiveness: A guide to decision analysis and economic evaluation (pp. 53–76). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington, L. W. (1981). Economic analysis of 24 factorial agronomic experiments. CIMMYT Economics Training Note, 1981. Retrieved from http://repository.cimmyt.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10883/855/25127.pdf

  • Hasler, M., & Böhlendorf, K. (2013). Multiple comparisons for multiple endpoints in agricultural experiments. Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 18, 578–593.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. (2009). The elements of statistical learning: Data mining, inference, and prediction (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hedeker, D., Mermelstein, R. J., & Demirtas, H. (2007). Analysis of binary outcomes with missing data: Missing = smoking, last observation carried forward, and a little multiple imputation. Addiction, 102, 1564–1573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmaster, B., & Hooker, C. (2013). Tragic choices and moral compromise: The ethics of allocating kidneys for transplantation. Milbank Quarterly, 91(3), 528–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, D. (2013). Report triggers quibbles over QALYs, a staple of health metrics. Nature Medicine, 19, 248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzer, H. J., Whitmore Schanzenbach, D., Duncan, G., & Ludwig, J. (2008). The economic costs of childhood poverty in the United States. Journal of Children and Poverty, 23(1), 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, J. C. (1984). Constrained simultaneous confidence intervals for multiple comparisons with the best. Annals of Statistics, 12, 1136–1144.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, D., White, I. R., Mason, D., & Sutton, S. (2014). A general method for handling missing binary outcome data in randomized controlled trials. Addiction, 109(12), 1986–1993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolata, G. (1992, November 24). Ethicists struggle to judge the ‘value’ of life. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/

  • Komro, K. A., Flay, B. R., Biglan, A., & The Promise Neighborhoods Research Consortium. (2011). Creating nurturing environments: A science-based framework for promoting child health and development within high-poverty neighborhoods. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 14, 111–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-011-0095-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozol, J. (2005). Confections of apartheid: A stick-and-carrot pedagogy for the children of our inner-city poor. Phi Delta Kappan, 85, 265–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuehl, R. O. (2000). Design of experiments: Statistical principles of research design and analysis (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kugler, K. C., Dziak, J. J., & Trail, J. B. (2018). Coding and interpretation of effects in analysis of data from a factorial experiment. In L. M. Collins & K. C. Kugler (Eds.), Optimization of behavioral, biobehavioral, and biomedical interventions: Advanced topics. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laber, E. B., Lizotte, D. J., & Ferguson, B. (2014). Set-valued dynamic treatment regimes for competing outcomes. Biometrics, 70, 53–61.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Li, R., & Lin, D. K. J. (2009). Variable selection for screening experiments. Quality Technology and Quantitative Management, 6(3), 271–280.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Li, R., Zhang, P., Barker, L. E., Chowdhury, F. M., & Zhang, X. (2010). Cost-effectiveness of interventions to prevent and control diabetes mellitus: A systematic review. Diabetes Care, 33, 1872–1894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindley, D. V. (1998). Decision analysis and bioequivalence trials. Statistical Science, 13, 136–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lizotte, D. J., Bowling, M., & Murphy, S. A. (2012). Linear fitted-Q iteration with multiple reward functions. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 13, 3253–3295.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Longford, N. T. (2016). Comparing two treatments by decision theory. Pharmaceutical Statistics, 15, 387–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R. D. (1956). Semiorders and a theory of utility discrimination. Econometrica, 24, 178–191.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C. F., & Tetenov, A. (2016). Sufficient trial size to inform clinical practice. Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, 113, 10518–10523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messonnier, M., & Meltzer, M. (2003). Cost-benefit analysis. In A. C. Haddiz, S. M. Teutsch, & P. S. Corso (Eds.), Prevention effectiveness: A guide to decision analysis and economic evaluation (pp. 127–155). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, B. F., Nowels, M. A., VanderWielen, L. M., & Gritz, R. M. (2016). Mental health parity’s limited impact on utilization and access for health plan beneficiaries. Washington, DC: Health Care Cost Institute. Executive summary retrieved from http://www.healthcostinstitute.org/files/HCCI-Issue-Brief-Mental-Health-Paritys-Limited-Impact.pdf

  • Muench, U., Coffman, J., & Spetz, J. (2016). Does independent scope of practice affect prescribing outcomes, healthcare costs, and utilization? Washington, DC: Health Care Cost Institute. Executive summary retrieved from http://www.healthcostinstitute.org/files/HCCI-Issue-Brief-Independent-Prescribing-Outcomes.pdf

  • Myers, J. L., & Well, A. D. (2003). Research design and statistical analysis (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, R. H., & Montgomery, D. C. (1995). Response surface methodology: Process and product optimization using designed experiments. New York, NY: Wiley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Nair, V., Strecher, V., Fagerlin, A., Ubel, P., Resnicow, K., Murphy, S., … Zhang, A. (2008). Screening experiments and the use of fractional factorial designs in behavioral intervention research. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 1354–1359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Advancing the power of economic evidence to inform investments in children, youth, and families. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/2348

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Communities in action: Pathways to health equity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24624

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini, C. A., Hoffman, S. A., Collins, L. M., & Spring, B. (2014). Optimization of remotely delivered intensive lifestyle treatment for obesity using the multiphase optimization strategy: Opt-IN study protocol. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 38(2), 251–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini, C. A., Hoffman, S. A., Collins, L. M., & Spring, B. (2014). Optimization of remotely delivered intensive lifestyle treatment for obesity using the multiphase optimization strategy: Opt-IN study protocol. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 38(2), 251–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini, C. A., Hoffman, S. A., Collins, L. M., & Spring, B. (2015b). Corrigendum to “Optimization of remotely delivered intensive lifestyle treatment for obesity using the Multiphase Optimization Strategy: Opt-IN study protocol”. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 45-B, 468–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2015.09.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrillo, J., & Cairns, J. (2008). Converting condition-specific measures into preference-based outcomes for use in economic evaluation. Expert Reviews in Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 8(5), 453–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrou, S., & Gray, A. (2011). Economic evaluation alongside randomised controlled trials: Design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. BMJ, 342, d1548. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d1548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prado, E. L., Sebayang, S. K., Apriatni, M., Adawiyah, S. R., Hidayati, N., Islamiyah, A., … Shankar, A. H. (2017). Maternal multiple micronutrient supplementation and other biomedical and socioenvironmental influences on children’s cognition at age 9–12 years in Indonesia: Follow-up of the SUMMIT randomised trial. Lancet Global Health, 5, e217–e228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, S., Willke, R., Briggs, A., Brown, R., Buxton, M., Chawla, A., … Reed, S. (2005). Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: The ISPOR RCT-CEA task force report. Value in Health, 8(5), 521–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, J. (1995). Mathematical statistics and data analysis (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Duxbury.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rosnow, R. L., & Rosenthal, R. (2003). Effect sizes for experimenting psychologists. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 221–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothmann, M., Li, N., Chen, G., Chi, G. Y. H., Temple, R., & Tsou, H.-H. (2003). Design and analysis of non-inferiority mortality trials in oncology. Statistics in Medicine, 22, 239–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saha, S., Gerdtham, U.-G., & Johansson, P. (2010). Economic evaluation of lifestyle interventions for preventing diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 7, 3150–3195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sculpher, M. J., Claxton, K., Drummond, M., & McCabe, C. (2006). Whither trial-based economic evaluation for health care decision making? Health Economics, 15, 677–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shoemaker, E. Z., Tully, L. M., Niendam, T. A., & Peterson, B. S. (2015). The next big thing in child and adolescent psychiatry: Interventions to prevent and intervene early in psychiatric illnesses. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 38, 475–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, G. E., & Perlis, R. H. (2010). Personalized medicine for depression: Can we match patients with treatments? American Journal of Psychiatry, 167, 1445–1455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, R., & Freedman, L. S. (1997). Bayesian design and analysis of two × two factorial clinical trials. Biometrics, 53, 456–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singal, A. G., Higgins, P. D. R., & Waljee, A. K. (2014). A primer on effectiveness and efficacy trials. Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology, 5, e45. https://doi.org/10.1038/ctg.2013.13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (2006). Shame indeed. Phi Delta Kappan, 87, 621–623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1987). Qualms about QALYs. Lancet, 1(8542), 1134–1136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, A. W., O’Hagan, A., & Miller, P. (2003). Case study in the Bayesian analysis of a cost-effectiveness trial in the evaluation of health care technologies: Depression. Pharmaceutical Statistics, 2, 51–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, G. M., & Feinn, R. (2012). Using effect size – Or why the p-value is not enough. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 4, 279–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taneja, B. K., & Dudewicz, E. J. (1987). Selection in factorial experiments with interaction, especially the 2 × 2 case. Acta Mathematica Sinica New Series, 3(3), 191–203.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Thall, P. F., & Cook, J. D. (2004). Dose-finding based on efficacy-toxicity trade-offs. Biometrics, 60, 684–693.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, A. G., Wadden, T. A., Volger, S., Sarwer, D. B., Vetter, M., Kumanyika, S., … Glick, H. A. (2013). Cost-effectiveness of a primary care intervention to treat obesity. International Journal of Obesity, 37, S31–S37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuffaha, H. W., Gordon, L. G., & Scuffham, P. A. (2014). Value of information analysis in healthcare: A review of principles and applications. Journal of Medical Economics, 17, 377–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ryzin, M. J., Roseth, C. J., Fosco, G. M., Lee, Y.-K., & Chen, I.-C. (2016). A component-centered meta-analysis of family-based prevention programs for adolescent substance use. Clinical Psychology Review, 45, 72–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vickers, A. J. (2001). The use of percentage change from baseline as an outcome in a controlled trial is statistically inefficient: A simulation study. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 1, 6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vickers, A. J., & Altman, D. G. (2001). Analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow up measurements. BMJ, 323, 1123–1124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, M. C., Siegel, J. E., Gold, M. R., Kamlet, M. S., & Russell, L. B. (1996). Recommendations of the panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Journal of the American Medical Association, 276, 1253–1258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. R. (2015). Medical ethics manual (3rd ed.). Ferney-Voltaire, France: The World Medical Association Retrieved from http://www.wma.net/en/70education/30print/10medical_ethics/

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, C., & Hamada, M. (2009). Experiments: Planning, analysis, and optimization (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, K. H., & Cheung, S. H. (1994). Subset selection for normal means in a two-way design. Biometrical Journal, 36(2), 165–175.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zerbe, R. O. (2004). Should moral sentiments be incorporated into benefit-cost analysis? An example of long-term discounting. Policy Sciences, 37, 305–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Z., Nie, L., Soon, G., & Zhang, B. (2014). Sensitivity analysis in non-inferiority trials with residual inconstancy after covariate adjustment. Applied Statistics, 63, 515–538.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The author thanks Dr. Linda Collins, Dr. Inbal Nahum-Shani, Dr. Daniel Max Crowley, and Dr. Kari Kugler for helpful discussions and comments on previous versions of this chapter and Amanda Applegate for proofreading assistance. Graphics were created using the R software package (https://www.r-project.org/).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John J. Dziak .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Dziak, J.J. (2018). Optimizing the Cost-Effectiveness of a Multicomponent Intervention Using Data from a Factorial Experiment: Considerations, Open Questions, and Tradeoffs Among Multiple Outcomes. In: Collins, L., Kugler, K. (eds) Optimization of Behavioral, Biobehavioral, and Biomedical Interventions. Statistics for Social and Behavioral Sciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91776-4_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics