Literature DB >> 22283692

Population- versus cohort-based modelling approaches.

Olivier Ethgen1, Baudouin Standaert.   

Abstract

While no single type of model can provide adequate answers under all circumstances, any modelling endeavour should incorporate three fundamental considerations in any decision-making question: the target population, the disease and the intervention characteristics. A target population is likely to be characterized by various types of heterogeneity and a dynamic evolution over time. It is therefore important to adequately capture these population effects on the results of a model. There are essentially two different approaches in modelling a population over time: a cohort-based approach and a population-based approach. In a cohort-based model, a closed group of individuals who have at least one specific characteristic or experience in common over a defined period of time is run through a state transition process. The cohort is generally composed of a hypothetical number of representative or 'average' individuals (i.e. the target population is considered to be a homogeneous group). The population-based approach projects the evolution of the estimated prevalent target population and intends to reflect as much as possible the demographic, epidemiological and clinical characteristics of the prevalent target population relevant for the decision problem. A cohort-based approach is generally used in most published healthcare decision models. However, this choice is rarely discussed by modellers. In this article, we challenge this assumption. To address the underlying decision problem, we affirm it is crucial that modellers consider the characteristics of the target population. Then, they could opt for using the most appropriate approach. Decision makers should also understand the impact on the results of both types of models in order to make informed healthcare decisions.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22283692     DOI: 10.2165/11593050-000000000-00000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  38 in total

1.  Incorporating option values into the economic evaluation of health care technologies.

Authors:  S Palmer; P C Smith
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Assessing the sensitivity of decision-analytic results to unobserved markers of risk: defining the effects of heterogeneity bias.

Authors:  Karen M Kuntz; Sue J Goldie
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.583

3.  Alternative decision modelling techniques for the evaluation of health care technologies: Markov processes versus discrete event simulation.

Authors:  Jonathan Karnon
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.046

4.  Accounting for the drug life cycle and future drug prices in cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Martin Hoyle
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 5.  The need for microsimulation to evaluate osteoporosis interventions.

Authors:  David J Vanness; Anna N A Tosteson; Sherine E Gabriel; L Joseph Melton
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2005-01-11       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Prevalence-based economic evaluation.

Authors:  J Mauskopf
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 5.725

7.  Decision-analytical modelling in health-care economic evaluations.

Authors:  Xin Sun; Thomas Faunce
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2007-10-18

8.  Comparison of Markov model and discrete-event simulation techniques for HIV.

Authors:  Kit N Simpson; Alvin Strassburger; Walter J Jones; Birgitta Dietz; Rukmini Rajagopalan
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Modelling in economic evaluation: an unavoidable fact of life.

Authors:  M J Buxton; M F Drummond; B A Van Hout; R L Prince; T A Sheldon; T Szucs; M Vray
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1997 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.046

10.  Probabilistic analysis and computationally expensive models: Necessary and required?

Authors:  Susan Griffin; Karl Claxton; Neil Hawkins; Mark Sculpher
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.725

View more
  15 in total

1.  Economic evaluations with agent-based modelling: an introduction.

Authors:  Jagpreet Chhatwal; Tianhua He
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Economics of vaccines revisited.

Authors:  Maarten J Postma; Baudouin A Standaert
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2013-01-30       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Smoking Cessation: A Comparison of Two Model Structures.

Authors:  Becky Pennington; Alex Filby; Lesley Owen; Matthew Taylor
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Budget impact analysis of first-line treatment with pazopanib for advanced renal cell carcinoma in Spain.

Authors:  Guillermo Villa; Luis-Javier Hernández-Pastor
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2013-09-02       Impact factor: 4.430

5.  Medium- to Long-Term Impact of Rotavirus Vaccination on Hospital Care in Belgium: A 7-Year Follow-Up of the Rotavirus Belgium Impact Study (RotaBIS).

Authors:  Baudouin Standaert; Danielle Strens; Ali Alwan; Marc Raes
Journal:  Infect Dis Ther       Date:  2015-12-31

6.  Methods for Health Economic Evaluation of Vaccines and Immunization Decision Frameworks: A Consensus Framework from a European Vaccine Economics Community.

Authors:  Bernhard Ultsch; Oliver Damm; Philippe Beutels; Joke Bilcke; Bernd Brüggenjürgen; Andreas Gerber-Grote; Wolfgang Greiner; Germaine Hanquet; Raymond Hutubessy; Mark Jit; Mirjam Knol; Rüdiger von Kries; Alexander Kuhlmann; Daniel Levy-Bruhl; Matthias Perleth; Maarten Postma; Heini Salo; Uwe Siebert; Jürgen Wasem; Ole Wichmann
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Dealing with Time in Health Economic Evaluation: Methodological Issues and Recommendations for Practice.

Authors:  James F O'Mahony; Anthony T Newall; Joost van Rosmalen
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Cost-Effectiveness of a Statewide Campaign to Promote Aspirin Use for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease.

Authors:  Tzeyu L Michaud; Jean Abraham; Hawre Jalal; Russell V Luepker; Sue Duval; Alan T Hirsch
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2015-12-23       Impact factor: 5.501

9.  The value of innovation under value-based pricing.

Authors:  Santiago G Moreno; Joshua A Ray
Journal:  J Mark Access Health Policy       Date:  2016-04-07

10.  Economic evaluation of the breast cancer screening programme in the Basque Country: retrospective cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis.

Authors:  Arantzazu Arrospide; Montserrat Rue; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Merce Comas; Myriam Soto-Gordoa; Garbiñe Sarriugarte; Javier Mar
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.