Literature DB >> 26377369

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

Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert1, Hawre J Jalal1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) may lead policy makers to take nonoptimal actions due to misestimates of decision uncertainty caused by ignoring correlations. We developed a method to establish joint uncertainty distributions of quality-of-life (QoL) weights exploiting ordinal preferences over health states.
METHODS: Our method takes as inputs independent, univariate marginal distributions for each QoL weight and a preference ordering. It establishes a correlation matrix between QoL weights intended to preserve the ordering. It samples QoL weight values from their distributions, ordering them with the correlation matrix. It calculates the proportion of samples violating the ordering, iteratively adjusting the correlation matrix until this proportion is below an arbitrarily small threshold. We compare our method with the uncorrelated method and other methods for preserving rank ordering in terms of violation proportions and fidelity to the specified marginal distributions along with PSA and expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI) estimates, using 2 models: 1) a decision tree with 2 decision alternatives and 2) a chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) Markov model with 3 alternatives.
RESULTS: All methods make tradeoffs between violating preference orderings and altering marginal distributions. For both models, our method simultaneously performed best, with largest performance advantages when distributions reflected wider uncertainty. For PSA, larger changes to the marginal distributions induced by existing methods resulted in differing conclusions about which strategy was most likely optimal. For EVPPI, both preference order violations and altered marginal distributions caused existing methods to misestimate the maximum value of seeking additional information, sometimes concluding that there was no value.
CONCLUSIONS: Analysts can characterize the joint uncertainty in QoL weights to improve PSA and value-of-information estimates using Open Source implementations of our method.
© The Author(s) 2015.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bias; correlated parameters; expected value of partial perfect information; joint distribution; parameter correlation; probabilistic sensitivity analysis; value of information

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26377369      PMCID: PMC4794424          DOI: 10.1177/0272989X15605091

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


  23 in total

1.  Incorporating calibrated model parameters into sensitivity analyses: deterministic and probabilistic approaches.

Authors:  Douglas C A Taylor; Vivek Pawar; Denise T Kruzikas; Kristen E Gilmore; Myrlene Sanon; Milton C Weinstein
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Correlations between parameters in risk models: estimation and propagation of uncertainty by Markov Chain Monte Carlo.

Authors:  A E Ades; G Lu
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.000

3.  Large-sample Bayesian posterior distributions for probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

Authors:  Gordon B Hazen; Min Huang
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2006 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Handling input correlations in pharmacoeconomic models.

Authors:  Klemen Naveršnik; Klemen Rojnik
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2012-02-17       Impact factor: 5.725

5.  Limitations of acceptability curves for presenting uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Bas Groot Koerkamp; M G Myriam Hunink; Theo Stijnen; James K Hammitt; Karen M Kuntz; Milton C Weinstein
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2007 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  Cost-effectiveness of treatment for chronic hepatitis C infection in an evolving patient population.

Authors:  Joshua A Salomon; Milton C Weinstein; James K Hammitt; Sue J Goldie
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-07-09       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Gaussian process modeling in conjunction with individual patient simulation modeling: a case study describing the calculation of cost-effectiveness ratios for the treatment of established osteoporosis.

Authors:  M D Stevenson; J Oakley; J B Chilcott
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.583

8.  Multiparameter calibration of a natural history model of cervical cancer.

Authors:  Jane J Kim; Karen M Kuntz; Natasha K Stout; Salaheddin Mahmud; Luisa L Villa; Eduardo L Franco; Sue J Goldie
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2007-05-25       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  Expected value of sample information calculations in medical decision modeling.

Authors:  A E Ades; G Lu; K Claxton
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  Cost effectiveness of fibrosis assessment prior to treatment for chronic hepatitis C patients.

Authors:  Shan Liu; Michaël Schwarzinger; Fabrice Carrat; Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  9 in total

1.  Prioritizing Additional Data Collection to Reduce Decision Uncertainty in the HIV/AIDS Response in 6 US Cities: A Value of Information Analysis.

Authors:  Xiao Zang; Hawre Jalal; Emanuel Krebs; Ankur Pandya; Haoxuan Zhou; Benjamin Enns; Bohdan Nosyk
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2020-10-03       Impact factor: 5.725

2.  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

3.  Cost-effectiveness of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Population-based Breast Cancer Screening: A Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis.

Authors:  Valérie D V Sankatsing; Karolina Juraniec; Sabine E Grimm; Manuela A Joore; Ruud M Pijnappel; Harry J de Koning; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Cost-effectiveness of Active Identification and Subsequent Colonoscopy Surveillance of Lynch Syndrome Cases.

Authors:  Elisabeth F P Peterse; Steffie K Naber; Corinne Daly; Aaron Pollett; Lawrence F Paszat; Manon C W Spaander; Melyssa Aronson; Robert Gryfe; Linda Rabeneck; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Nancy N Baxter
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 11.382

5.  Using Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarker Testing to Target Treatment to Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  Tzeyu L Michaud; Robert L Kane; J Riley McCarten; Joseph E Gaugler; John A Nyman; Karen M Kuntz
Journal:  Pharmacoecon Open       Date:  2018-09

6.  Cost-effectiveness of population-level proactive tobacco cessation outreach among socio-economically disadvantaged smokers: evaluation of a randomized control trial.

Authors:  Viengneesee Thao; John A Nyman; David B Nelson; Anne M Joseph; Barbara Clothier; Patrick J Hammett; Steven S Fu
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2019-09-04       Impact factor: 6.526

7.  Simulating Study Data to Support Expected Value of Sample Information Calculations: A Tutorial.

Authors:  Anna Heath; Mark Strong; David Glynn; Natalia Kunst; Nicky J Welton; Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2021-08-13       Impact factor: 2.749

8.  Cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary care in mild to moderate chronic kidney disease in the United States: A modeling study.

Authors:  Eugene Lin; Glenn M Chertow; Brandon Yan; Elizabeth Malcolm; Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 11.069

9.  Operative Versus Nonoperative Management of Appendicitis: A Long-Term Cost Effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  Lindsay A Sceats; Seul Ku; Alanna Coughran; Britainy Barnes; Emily Grimm; Matthew Muffly; David A Spain; Cindy Kin; Douglas K Owens; Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert
Journal:  MDM Policy Pract       Date:  2019-08-17
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.