| Literature DB >> 30187294 |
Salah Ghabri1, Matt Stevenson2, Jörgen Möller3, J Jaime Caro4,5,6,7.
Abstract
Models have become a nearly essential component of health technology assessment. This is because the efficacy and safety data available from clinical trials are insufficient to provide the required estimates of impact of new interventions over long periods of time and for other populations and subgroups. Despite more than five decades of use of these decision-analytic models, decision makers are still often presented with poorly validated models and thus trust in their results is impaired. Among the reasons for this vexing situation are the artificial nature of the models, impairing their validation against observable data, the complexity in their formulation and implementation, the lack of data against which to validate the model results, and the challenges of short timelines and insufficient resources. This article addresses this crucial problem of achieving models that produce results that can be trusted and the resulting requirements for validation and transparency, areas where our field is currently deficient. Based on their differing perspectives and experiences, the authors characterize the situation and outline the requirements for improvement and pragmatic solutions to the problem of inadequate validation.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30187294 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0711-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmacoeconomics ISSN: 1170-7690 Impact factor: 4.981