Literature DB >> 14570296

The impact of ignoring population heterogeneity when Markov models are used in cost-effectiveness analysis.

Gregory S Zaric1.   

Abstract

Many factors related to the spread and progression of diseases vary throughout a population. This heterogeneity is frequently ignored in cost-effectiveness analyses by using average or representative values or by considering multiple risk groups. The author explores the impact that such simplifying assumptions may have on the results and interpretation of cost-effectiveness analyses when Markov models are used to calculate the costs and health impact of interventions. A discrete-time Markov model for a disease is defined, and 5 potential interventions are considered. Health benefits, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are calculated for each intervention. It is assumed that the population is heterogeneous with respect to the probability of becoming sick. Ignoring this heterogeneity may lead to optimistic or pessimistic estimates of cost-effectiveness ratios, depending on the intervention and, in some cases, the parameter values. Implications are discussed of this finding on the use of league tables and on comparisons of cost-effectiveness ratios versus commonly accepted threshold values.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14570296     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X03256883

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  10 in total

1.  Population- versus cohort-based modelling approaches.

Authors:  Olivier Ethgen; Baudouin Standaert
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  It's time to choose the study design!: net benefit analysis of alternative study designs to acquire information for evaluation of health technologies.

Authors:  Oren Shavit; Moshe Leshno; Assaf Goldberger; Amir Shmueli; Amnon Hoffman
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Decision-analytic models: current methodological challenges.

Authors:  J Jaime Caro; Jörgen Möller
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Validation of a DICE Simulation Against a Discrete Event Simulation Implemented Entirely in Code.

Authors:  Jörgen Möller; Sarah Davis; Matt Stevenson; J Jaime Caro
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Bias associated with failing to incorporate dependence on event history in Markov models.

Authors:  Tanya G K Bentley; Karen M Kuntz; Jeanne S Ringel
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2010-04-16       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 6.  Acknowledging patient heterogeneity in economic evaluation : a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Janneke P C Grutters; Mark Sculpher; Andrew H Briggs; Johan L Severens; Math J Candel; James E Stahl; Dirk De Ruysscher; Albert Boer; Bram L T Ramaekers; Manuela A Joore
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Risk stratification in compartmental epidemic models: Where to draw the line?

Authors:  Sze-Chuan Suen; Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Margaret L Brandeau
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2017-06-09       Impact factor: 2.405

8.  Pharmacogenomics Bias - Systematic distortion of study results by genetic heterogeneity.

Authors:  Uwe Siebert; Gaby Sroczynski; Vera Zietemann
Journal:  GMS Health Technol Assess       Date:  2008-04-15

9.  Predicting the Effectiveness of Endemic Infectious Disease Control Interventions: The Impact of Mass Action versus Network Model Structure.

Authors:  Giovanni S P Malloy; Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Eva A Enns; Margaret L Brandeau
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2021-04-24       Impact factor: 2.749

10.  The impact of individual-level heterogeneity on estimated infectious disease burden: a simulation study.

Authors:  Scott A McDonald; Brecht Devleesschauwer; Jacco Wallinga
Journal:  Popul Health Metr       Date:  2016-12-08
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.