Literature DB >> 16076237

Using value of information analysis to inform publicly funded research priorities.

Laura Ginnelly1, Karl Claxton, Mark J Sculpher, Sue Golder.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the application and feasibility of using value of information analysis to help set priorities for research as part of the UK National Health Service (NHS) Health Technology Assessment Programme. Probabilistic decision analysis and value of information methods were applied to a research topic under consideration by the National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment (NCCHTA), in the UK. The case study presented considers whether long-term, low-dose antibacterial treatment of recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) in children is effective and cost effective compared with short-term antibacterial therapy.
METHODS: A probabilistic decision-analytic model was developed, within which evidence from published sources was synthesised. Eight subgroups were considered and defined in terms of sex and presence of vesico-ureteral reflux (VUR). Costs were assessed from an NHS perspective, and benefits were expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Simulation methods were used to determine the probability that alternative therapies would be cost effective at a range of threshold values that the NHS may attach to an additional QALY. Value of information analysis was used to quantify the cost of uncertainty associated with the decision about which therapy to adopt, which indicates the maximum value of future research. The feasibility and practicality of using value of information methods to help inform research prioritization was evaluated.
RESULTS: At a threshold value for an additional QALY of 30,000 pound , long-term antibacterial treatment may be regarded as cost effective for all eight patient groups. There was, however, substantial uncertainty surrounding the choice of antibacterial. DISCUSSION/
CONCLUSION: The use of value of information methods was feasible and could inform research prioritization for the NHS. In the context of this specific decision faced by the NHS, the results show that long-term low-dose antibacterials for preventing recurrent UTIs may be cost effective, based on current evidence. However, the analysis suggests that further primary research with longer follow-up may be worthwhile, particularly for girls with no VUR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16076237     DOI: 10.2165/00148365-200504010-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy        ISSN: 1175-5652            Impact factor:   2.561


  12 in total

Review 1.  [Public access defibrillation. Limited use by trained first responders and laymen].

Authors:  S Maisch; P Friederich; A E Goetz
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 2.  A systematic and critical review of the evolving methods and applications of value of information in academia and practice.

Authors:  Lotte Steuten; Gijs van de Wetering; Karin Groothuis-Oudshoorn; Valesca Retèl
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Cost-effectiveness analysis: a proposal of new reporting standards in statistical analysis.

Authors:  Heejung Bang; Hongwei Zhao
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 1.051

4.  Statin therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: a cost-effectiveness and value-of-information analysis.

Authors:  Nick Bansback; Roberta Ara; Sue Ward; Aslam Anis; Hyon K Choi
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Developing clinical practice guidelines: types of evidence and outcomes; values and economics, synthesis, grading, and presentation and deriving recommendations.

Authors:  Steven Woolf; Holger J Schünemann; Martin P Eccles; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Paul Shekelle
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2012-07-04       Impact factor: 7.327

6.  Value of information: interim analysis of a randomized, controlled trial of goal-directed hemodynamic treatment for aged patients.

Authors:  Erzsebet Bartha; Thomas Davidson; Thor-Henrik Brodtkorb; Per Carlsson; Sigridur Kalman
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2013-07-09       Impact factor: 2.279

7.  Quantitative benefit-harm assessment for setting research priorities: the example of roflumilast for patients with COPD.

Authors:  Milo A Puhan; Tsung Yu; Cynthia M Boyd; Gerben Ter Riet
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 8.775

8.  Using HTA and guideline development as a tool for research priority setting the NICE way: reducing research waste by identifying the right research to fund.

Authors:  Tarang Sharma; Moni Choudhury; Juan Carlos Rejón-Parrilla; Pall Jonsson; Sarah Garner
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-03-08       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 9.  A systematic review and methodological evaluation of published cost-effectiveness analyses of aromatase inhibitors versus tamoxifen in early stage breast cancer.

Authors:  Ava A John-Baptiste; Wei Wu; Paula Rochon; Geoffrey M Anderson; Chaim M Bell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The value of heterogeneity for cost-effectiveness subgroup analysis: conceptual framework and application.

Authors:  Manuel A Espinoza; Andrea Manca; Karl Claxton; Mark J Sculpher
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2014-06-18       Impact factor: 2.583

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.