Impact numbers in health policy decisions

被引:36
作者
Attia, J
Page, J
Heller, RF
Dobson, AJ
机构
[1] Univ Newcastle, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Ctr Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Newcastle, NSW 2308, Australia
[2] Harvard Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Univ Manchester, Sch Med, Evidence Populat Hlth Unit, Manchester, Lancs, England
[4] Univ Queensland, Sch Populat Hlth, St Lucia, Qld 4067, Australia
关键词
D O I
10.1136/jech.56.8.600
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Objective: To outline the major methodological issues appropriate to the use of the population impact number (PIN) and the disease impact number (DIN) in health policy decision making. Design: Review of literature and calculation of PIN and DIN statistics in different settings. Setting: Previously proposed extensions to the number needed to treat (NNT): the DIN and the PIN, which give a population perspective to this measure. Main results: The PIN and DIN allow us to compare the population impact of different interventions either within the same disease or in different diseases or conditions. The primary studies used for relative risk estimates should have outcomes, time periods and comparison groups that are congruent and relevant to the local setting. These need to be combined with local data on disease rates and population size. Depending on the particular problem, the target may be disease incidence or prevalence and the effects of interest may be either the incremental impact or the total impact of each intervention. For practical application, it will be important to use sensitivity analyses to determine plausible intervals for the impact numbers. Conclusions: Attention to various methodological issues will permit the DIN and PIN to be used to assist health policy makers assign a population perspective to measures of risk.
引用
收藏
页码:600 / 605
页数:6
相关论文
共 23 条
  • [1] Calculating the number needed to treat for trials where the outcome is time to an event
    Altman, DG
    Andersen, PK
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1999, 319 (7223) : 1492 - 1495
  • [2] Confidence intervals for the number needed to treat
    Altman, DG
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1998, 317 (7168) : 1309 - 1312
  • [3] Impact numbers in health policy decisions
    Attia, J
    Page, J
    Heller, RF
    Dobson, AJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH, 2002, 56 (08) : 600 - 605
  • [4] *AUSTR I HLTH WELF, 1998, CANC SER, V10
  • [5] Expressing the magnitude of adverse effects in case-control studies: "the number of patients needed to be treated for one additional patient to be harmed"
    Bjerre, LM
    LeLorier, J
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 320 (7233) : 503 - 506
  • [6] A COMPARISON OF ENALAPRIL WITH HYDRALAZINE ISOSORBIDE DINITRATE IN THE TREATMENT OF CHRONIC CONGESTIVE-HEART-FAILURE
    COHN, JN
    JOHNSON, G
    ZIESCHE, S
    COBB, F
    FRANCIS, G
    TRISTANI, F
    SMITH, R
    DUNKMAN, WB
    LOEB, H
    WONG, ML
    BHAT, G
    GOLDMAN, S
    FLETCHER, RD
    DOHERTY, J
    HUGHES, CV
    CARSON, P
    CINTRON, G
    SHABETAI, R
    HAAKENSON, C
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1991, 325 (05) : 303 - 310
  • [7] THE NUMBER NEEDED TO TREAT - A CLINICALLY USEFUL MEASURE OF TREATMENT EFFECT
    COOK, RJ
    SACKETT, DL
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1995, 310 (6977) : 452 - 454
  • [8] ABC of heart failure - History and epidemiology
    Davis, RC
    Hobbs, FDR
    Lip, GYH
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 320 (7226) : 39 - 42
  • [9] AN EVIDENCE BASED APPROACH TO INDIVIDUALIZING TREATMENT
    GLASZIOU, PP
    IRWIG, LM
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1995, 311 (7016): : 1356 - 1359
  • [10] GLOVER J, 1992, SOCIAL HLTH ATLAS AU, V2