Literature DB >> 22999129

Conceptualizing a model: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force--2.

Mark Roberts1, Louise B Russell, A David Paltiel, Michael Chambers, Phil McEwan, Murray Krahn.   

Abstract

The appropriate development of a model begins with understanding the problem that is being represented. The aim of this article was to provide a series of consensus-based best practices regarding the process of model conceptualization. For the purpose of this series of articles, we consider the development of models whose purpose is to inform medical decisions and health-related resource allocation questions. We specifically divide the conceptualization process into two distinct components: the conceptualization of the problem, which converts knowledge of the health care process or decision into a representation of the problem, followed by the conceptualization of the model itself, which matches the attributes and characteristics of a particular modeling type with the needs of the problem being represented. Recommendations are made regarding the structure of the modeling team, agreement on the statement of the problem, the structure, perspective, and target population of the model, and the interventions and outcomes represented. Best practices relating to the specific characteristics of model structure and which characteristics of the problem might be most easily represented in a specific modeling method are presented. Each section contains a number of recommendations that were iterated among the authors, as well as among the wider modeling taskforce, jointly set up by the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and the Society for Medical Decision Making.
Copyright © 2012 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22999129      PMCID: PMC4207095          DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.06.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  53 in total

1.  A clinically based discrete-event simulation of end-stage liver disease and the organ allocation process.

Authors:  Steven M Shechter; Cindy L Bryce; Oguzhan Alagoz; Jennifer E Kreke; James E Stahl; Andrew J Schaefer; Derek C Angus; Mark S Roberts
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 2.  Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: the ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force report.

Authors:  Scott Ramsey; Richard Willke; Andrew Briggs; Ruth Brown; Martin Buxton; Anita Chawla; John Cook; Henry Glick; Bengt Liljas; Diana Petitti; Shelby Reed
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.725

3.  Exploration of the difference in results of economic submissions to the National Institute of Clinical Excellence by manufacturers and assessment groups.

Authors:  Deven Chauhan; Alec H Miners; Alastair J Fischer
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.188

4.  Cost-effectiveness of specialized multidisciplinary heart failure clinics in Ontario, Canada.

Authors:  Harindra C Wijeysundera; Márcio Machado; Xuesong Wang; Gabrielle Van Der Velde; Nancy Sikich; William Witteman; Jack V Tu; Douglas S Lee; Shaun G Goodman; Robert Petrella; Martin O'Flaherty; Simon Capewell; Murray Krahn
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2010-11-23       Impact factor: 5.725

5.  Costing and perspective in published cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Peter J Neumann
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 6.  Primer on medical decision analysis: Part 1--Getting started.

Authors:  A S Detsky; G Naglie; M D Krahn; D Naimark; D A Redelmeier
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1997 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Model parameter estimation and uncertainty: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force--6.

Authors:  Andrew H Briggs; Milton C Weinstein; Elisabeth A L Fenwick; Jonathan Karnon; Mark J Sculpher; A David Paltiel
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.725

8.  A mathematical simulation of the inflammatory response to anthrax infection.

Authors:  Rukmini Kumar; Carson C Chow; John D Bartels; Gilles Clermont; Yoram Vodovotz
Journal:  Shock       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 3.454

9.  Management of acute dysuria. A decision-analysis model of alternative strategies.

Authors:  K J Carlson; A G Mulley
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1985-02       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Strategy for rubella vaccination.

Authors:  E G Knox
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1980-03       Impact factor: 7.196

View more
  59 in total

Review 1.  Structural Design and Data Requirements for Simulation Modelling in HIV/AIDS: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Xiao Zang; Emanuel Krebs; Linwei Wang; Brandon D L Marshall; Reuben Granich; Bruce R Schackman; Julio S G Montaner; Bohdan Nosyk
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Decision-analytic models: current methodological challenges.

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

3.  Universal late pregnancy ultrasound screening to predict adverse outcomes in nulliparous women: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Gordon Cs Smith; Alexandros A Moraitis; David Wastlund; Jim G Thornton; Aris Papageorghiou; Julia Sanders; Alexander Ep Heazell; Stephen C Robson; Ulla Sovio; Peter Brocklehurst; Edward Cf Wilson
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 4.014

4.  How Qualitative Methods Can be Used to Inform Model Development.

Authors:  Samantha Husbands; Susan Jowett; Pelham Barton; Joanna Coast
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Modeling Approaches in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Disease-Modifying Therapies for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: An Updated Systematic Review and Recommendations for Future Economic Evaluations.

Authors:  Luis Hernandez; Malinda O'Donnell; Maarten Postma
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Simulation as an ethical imperative and epistemic responsibility for the implementation of medical guidelines in health care.

Authors:  Luciana Garbayo; James Stahl
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2017-03

Review 7.  A systematic review of the quality of economic models comparing thrombosis inhibitors in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Maximilian H M Hatz; Reiner Leidl; Nichola A Yates; Björn Stollenwerk
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 8.  When to use discrete event simulation (DES) for the economic evaluation of health technologies? A review and critique of the costs and benefits of DES.

Authors:  Jonathan Karnon; Hossein Haji Ali Afzali
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 9.  Challenges in modelling the cost effectiveness of various interventions for cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Laura T Burgers; William K Redekop; Johan L Severens
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Discretely Integrated Condition Event (DICE) Simulation for Pharmacoeconomics.

Authors:  J Jaime Caro
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.