Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 15, 2025

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Factors Limiting Subgroup Analysis in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis and a Call for Transparency
Gemma E Shields1, Mark Wilberforce2, Paul Clarkson3
1Division of Population Health, Health Services Research, and Primary Care, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Centre for Health Economics, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. gemma.shields@manchester.ac.uk.
Abstract:
The use of population averages in cost-effectiveness analysis may hide important differences across subgroups, potentially resulting in suboptimal resource allocation, reduced population health and/or increased health inequalities. We discuss the factors that limit subgroup analysis in cost-effectiveness analysis and propose more thorough and transparent reporting. There are many issues that may limit whether subgroup analysis can be robustly included in cost-effectiveness analysis, including challenges with prespecifying and justifying subgroup analysis, identifying subgroups that can be implemented (identified and targeted) in practice, resource and data requirements, and statistical and ethical concerns. These affect every stage of the design, development and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses. It may not always be possible to include and report relevant subgroups in cost effectiveness, e.g. due to data limitations. Reasons for not conducting subgroup analysis may be heterogeneous, and the consequences of not acknowledging patient heterogeneity can be substantial. We recommend that when potentially relevant subgroups have not been included in a cost-effectiveness analysis, authors report this and discuss their rationale and the limitations of this. Greater transparency of subgroup reporting should provide a starting point to overcoming these challenges in future research.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Bioequivalence Data: Statistical Interpretation
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...

