Literature DB >> 17638032

Estimating the expected value of partial perfect information: a review of methods.

Doug Coyle1, Jeremy Oakley.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Value of information analysis provides a framework for the analysis of uncertainty within economic analysis by focussing on the value of obtaining further information to reduce uncertainty. The mathematical definition of the expected value of perfect information (EVPI) is fixed, though there are different methods in the literature for its estimation. In this paper these methods are explored and compared.
METHODS: Analysis was conducted using a disease model for Parkinson's disease. Five methods for estimating partial EVPIs (EVPPIs) were used: a single Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) method, the unit normal loss integral (UNLI) method, a two-stage method using MCS, a two-stage method using MCS and quadrature and a difference method requiring two MCS. EVPPI was estimated for each individual parameter in the model as well as for three groups of parameters (transition probabilities, costs and utilities).
RESULTS: Using 5,000 replications, four methods returned similar results for EVPPIs. With 5 million replications, results were near identical. However, the difference method repeatedly gave estimates substantially different to the other methods.
CONCLUSIONS: The difference method is not rooted in the mathematical definition of EVPI and is clearly an inappropriate method for estimating EVPPI. The single MCS and UNLI methods were the least complex methods to use, but are restricted in their appropriateness. The two-stage MCS and quadrature-based methods are complex and time consuming. Thus, where appropriate, EVPPI should be estimated using either the single MCS or UNLI method. However, where neither of these methods is appropriate, either of the two-stage MCS and quadrature methods should be used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17638032     DOI: 10.1007/s10198-007-0069-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Health Econ        ISSN: 1618-7598


  16 in total

1.  Coping with uncertainty on health decisions: assessing new solutions.

Authors:  Fernando Antoñanzas; Roberto Rodríguez-Ibeas; Carmelo A Juárez-Castelló
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2012-08

2.  Computing Expected Value of Partial Sample Information from Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis Using Linear Regression Metamodeling.

Authors:  Hawre Jalal; Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Karen M Kuntz
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2015-04-03       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 3.  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

4.  Some Health States Are Better Than Others: Using Health State Rank Order to Improve Probabilistic Analyses.

Authors:  Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Hawre J Jalal
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2015-09-16       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Cost-Effectiveness of Carotid Plaque MR Imaging as a Stroke Risk Stratification Tool in Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis.

Authors:  Ajay Gupta; Alvin I Mushlin; Hooman Kamel; Babak B Navi; Ankur Pandya
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-06-17       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  The health-related, social, and economic consequences of parkinsonism: a controlled national study.

Authors:  Poul Jennum; Marielle Zoetmulder; Lise Korbo; Jakob Kjellberg
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2011-03-11       Impact factor: 4.849

7.  Value of Information Analysis in Models to Inform Health Policy.

Authors:  Christopher H Jackson; Gianluca Baio; Anna Heath; Mark Strong; Nicky J Welton; Edward C F Wilson
Journal:  Annu Rev Stat Appl       Date:  2022-03-07       Impact factor: 7.917

8.  Calculating the Expected Value of Sample Information in Practice: Considerations from 3 Case Studies.

Authors:  Anna Heath; Natalia Kunst; Christopher Jackson; Mark Strong; Fernando Alarid-Escudero; Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Gianluca Baio; Nicolas A Menzies; Hawre Jalal
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2020-04-16       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Linear regression metamodeling as a tool to summarize and present simulation model results.

Authors:  Hawre Jalal; Bryan Dowd; François Sainfort; Karen M Kuntz
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2013-06-27       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  Computing the Expected Value of Sample Information Efficiently: Practical Guidance and Recommendations for Four Model-Based Methods.

Authors:  Natalia Kunst; Edward C F Wilson; David Glynn; Fernando Alarid-Escudero; Gianluca Baio; Alan Brennan; Michael Fairley; Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Chris Jackson; Hawre Jalal; Nicolas A Menzies; Mark Strong; Howard Thom; Anna Heath
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2020-05-27       Impact factor: 5.725

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.