1. Describe the logistic regression and the ordinary least squares regression models and illustrate the use of each approach using examples (one for each model) in the context of an economic evaluation of health care intervention.
2. Discuss censoring as it arises in the analysis of time-to-event data. Describe the Kaplan-Meir estimator and explain how it deals with censoring. How can estimates of gain in effectiveness be derived using the estimator? Comparing with other methods describe how this estimator might be used to extrapolate results beyond the end of a clinical trial.
3. Which non-parametric statistical method could be used to estimate the mean cost of a health care intervention using patient level data in the presence of censoring over the duration of the medical study? What are the assumptions underlying each of the approaches and under what circumstances might one approach be preferred to another?
4. What are the difficulties associated with the missing data in the analysis of patient level data? Discuss possible solutions.
5. Why are standard statistical methods for estimating confidence interval inappropriate for the ICER statistics? Discuss alternative methods and have been proposed to calculate the variance of the ICER outlining their advantages and disadvantages. Which would be the preferred method?
6. Why might logistic regression be preferred over ordinary least square estimation in estimating health care events?
7. Why might a parametric estimate of survival time be preferred to a non-parametric estimator of survival time?
8. Discuss the various estimators available for the analysis of censored cost data. Which of these available estimators do you prefer and why?
9. How might uncertainty surrounding the estimate of the ICER be handled? Why some methods be preferred over others?
10. Discuss the problems that might be arise in estimating the analyzing the ICER using clinical trial data.
11. How might a logistic regression be used to quantify levels of effectiveness in an economic evaluation in health care?
12. Discuss Kaplan- Meir estimator its use in estimating gains in clinical outcomes. Comparing with other methods to estimate clinical outcomes describe how the Kaplan-Meir estimator can be used to extrapolate beyond the end of clinical trial.
13. “Provided a parametric survival model can be shown to fit the data it will always be preferred to a non-parametric approach’. Discuss
14. If censoring is present in cost-to-event data, which estimators might you apply to deal with this problem?
15. Describe the various methods used to calculate the variance of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio outlining their strengths and limitations. Discuss the view that the net benefit statistic outcomes the limitations of the other approaches.
16. What are the major problems associated with applying economic data to a clinical trial?
People are subjective in light of the fact that regardless of endeavoring to quit influencing world that they are a piece of, they are evolving it. This relationship, which causes an adjustment on the planet through activity, changes any target see into a subjective one since they are impacting what an unadulterated spectator can’t. By endeavoring to just quit ‘doing’ and simply watch, individuals endeavor to achieve a condition of unadulterated objectivity. This, in any case, turns into an incomprehensible assignment once one considers that their simple presence is a ‘demonstration’ all by itself. Implying that the best way to wind up genuinely objective is to incidentally quit existing, watch simply in that non-existent state, and afterward continue existing inside the world as a person. To have the capacity to considerably consider playing out these outlandish errands is much the same as being God. Altogether, it is unimaginable for an individual to accomplish a condition of non presence basically on the grounds that the unimportant demonstration of living makes one end up subjective because of the reality they have an effect on their general surroundings. While they are youthful, people inevitably achieve a moment that they end up mindful that their presences are concealed in selectiveness. They see that their lives are loaded with decisions, byways which make it evident that at whatever point one picks something, something different must be avoided. These decisions can bring the torment of weighing between the choices and the separate results, and additionally grappling with the possibility that one can’t have everything. Considering the human restriction of excluding one thing so as to increase another, individuals will dependably go after a level of objectivity in their decisions; they need to expel a portion of the agony and trouble that they feel from making those decisions by disconnecting themselves candidly from the decisions they need to make. In spite of reality of presence lying in subjectivity, there is a Catch 22 appeared here; that people are relatively preset to go after objectivity notwithstanding the ‘appropriate response’ existing in the other course: past subjectivity. To come to the ‘appropriate response’ of life, one should first deal with reality of presence. Kierkegaard’s existential truth is subjectivity; for a human to comprehend that subjectivity is the center of presence at that point empowers them to seek after and in the end comprehend the ‘appropriate response’ to life. Subjectivity in itself is vital to get a handle on as a human, and subsequently, it likewise fills in as a separation between the basic man and the insightful man. On the off chance that the astute man is being subjective, he realizes that there is a distinction amongst subjectivity and objectivity. In any case, the main sign that he is as a rule ‘totally subjective’ at a given point is that he equitably knows the contrast amongst ‘objectivity’ and ‘subjectivity’. This understanding enables him to get a handle on the idea of the ‘appropriate response’ to life while in the meantime raises the Catch 22 of just being subjective while being objective. Interestingly, if the basic man is being subjective, he is essentially being subjective by purpose of motivation and would not know about it. Accordingly the straightforward man can’t be considered to have achieved an indistinguishable existential truth from the astute man. To be savvy is a revile and in addition a gift, for the Catch 22 shows him the significance of the existential truth, while in the meantime, keeps him from achieving it. Given Kierkegaard’s conviction that the existential truth is subjectivity, that all people in the long run move toward becoming at any rate marginally objective and that individuals should be somewhat objective with a specific end goal to be subjective, at that point a conundrum presents itself. In the event that a human can’t be subjective without being target then this makes one wonder about regardless of whether a human achieve a condition of unadulterated subjectivity. Inside the World-Historical view, there is however a solitary target truth to any individual occasion all through history, yet subjectivity demonstrates an alternate, singular truth for each individual review it. Seeing that individuals can’t dispassionately watch and thoroughly consider the past (without first achieving the unimaginable undertaking of getting to be God-like), individuals are left to see the occasions themselves from the present, filling in the holes between target actualities with subjective elucidations. These all order to subjective realities; each being reality, yet none being any pretty much legitimate than the last. By being human, one is limited by the ‘world’ they have subjectively built; a world made with the subjective certainties affected by their own particular considerations, sentiments and encounters. In any case, as mostly subjective presences in what must be seen as a simply subjective world, one must inquire as to whether individuals can truly exist in the same ‘world’ as any other individual and if the response to that inquiry changes the ‘appropriate response’ to life itself. This presents us with the last oddity; that keeping in mind the end goal to acquire the ‘appropriate response’ one must be a target and static substance, yet people in general are subjective just through presence. Were one to ‘discover’ the purported ‘reply’ to life, one’s life would in a general sense change. In any case, as an immediate aftereffect of finding that ‘answer’, this recently changed life is essentially another life all by itself. This new life is in any event somewhat unique in relation to the old life and, subsequently, has another subjective truth to it. This successfully renders the past ‘answer’ useless, maybe having never existed in any case. This in itself demonstrates that the ‘appropriate response’ can’t be found in the continually dynamic ‘life’, however just in the static ‘demise’ where the steady, static world is unaffected by a man. In spite of this, the ‘appropriate response’ holds no significance after death and can’t be imparted to the living bringing about a similar absence of ‘truth’. Therefore, I’ve discovered that I can’t present my response to this deep rooted task, and that to do as such I would have to never again be viewed as ‘alive’. I apologize and might want to ask for an expansion; ideally to at some point in the late 2070’s. Need assistance with your article? Investigate what our article composing administration can improve the situation you: Enter our Essay Archive Paper Writing Service Understudy composing a paper on a workstation Our Dissertation Writing administration can help including full expositions to singular sections. Stamping Service Speaker stamping work Our Marking Service will enable you to choose the zones of your work that need change. All Services Understudy composing a task on a PC Completely referenced, conveyed on time. Get the additional help you require now. FREE APA Referencing Tool FREE Harvard Referencing Tool FREE Vancouver Referencing Tool FREE Study Guides>