PuSH - Publication Server of Helmholtz Zentrum München: Cost-of-illness studies based on massive data: A prevalence-based, top-down regression approach.

Information

Clues to quality of journals

Open Access Policy of Helmholtz Association 2016

CC Licencences

Publication Metrics

Navigation

Home

Deutsch

EVA: Electronic Publishing

New EVA Application

Research

Advanced Search

Browse by ...

... HMGU-Authors/Consortia

... Organizational Structure

... Journal

... Publication Type

... Research Data

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Publication Year

Publication overview

Statistics

Statistics (last 5 years)

OA Publications

Publish

Submit Publication

Import publication from...

...EVA

Report missing publication

Highlights

Support & Contact

Contact persons

Help

Data protection

Helmholtz Open Science

JANE Journal Estimator

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Stollenwerk, B. ; Welchowski, T. ; Vogl, M. ; Stock, S.*

Cost-of-illness studies based on massive data: A prevalence-based, top-down regression approach.

Eur. J. Health Econ. 17, 235-244 (2016)

DOI

PMC

Open Access Green as soon as Postprint is submitted to ZB.

Abstract
Metrics
Extra information

Despite the increasing availability of routine data, no analysis method has yet been presented for cost-of-illness (COI) studies based on massive data. We aim, first, to present such a method and, second, to assess the relevance of the associated gain in numerical efficiency. We propose a prevalence-based, top-down regression approach consisting of five steps: aggregating the data; fitting a generalized additive model (GAM); predicting costs via the fitted GAM; comparing predicted costs between prevalent and non-prevalent subjects; and quantifying the stochastic uncertainty via error propagation. To demonstrate the method, it was applied to aggregated data in the context of chronic lung disease to German sickness funds data (from 1999), covering over 7.3 million insured. To assess the gain in numerical efficiency, the computational time of the innovative approach has been compared with corresponding GAMs applied to simulated individual-level data. Furthermore, the probability of model failure was modeled via logistic regression. Applying the innovative method was reasonably fast (19 min). In contrast, regarding patient-level data, computational time increased disproportionately by sample size. Furthermore, using patient-level data was accompanied by a substantial risk of model failure (about 80 % for 6 million subjects). The gain in computational efficiency of the innovative COI method seems to be of practical relevance. Furthermore, it may yield more precise cost estimates.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Scopus
Cited By

Altmetric

0.000

1.083