Literature DB >> 32297840

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

Anna Heath1,2,3, Natalia Kunst4,5,6,7, Christopher Jackson8, Mark Strong9, Fernando Alarid-Escudero10, Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert11, Gianluca Baio3, Nicolas A Menzies12, Hawre Jalal13.   

Abstract

Background. Investing efficiently in future research to improve policy decisions is an important goal. Expected value of sample information (EVSI) can be used to select the specific design and sample size of a proposed study by assessing the benefit of a range of different studies. Estimating EVSI with the standard nested Monte Carlo algorithm has a notoriously high computational burden, especially when using a complex decision model or when optimizing over study sample sizes and designs. Recently, several more efficient EVSI approximation methods have been developed. However, these approximation methods have not been compared, and therefore their comparative performance across different examples has not been explored. Methods. We compared 4 EVSI methods using 3 previously published health economic models. The examples were chosen to represent a range of real-world contexts, including situations with multiple study outcomes, missing data, and data from an observational rather than a randomized study. The computational speed and accuracy of each method were compared. Results. In each example, the approximation methods took minutes or hours to achieve reasonably accurate EVSI estimates, whereas the traditional Monte Carlo method took weeks. Specific methods are particularly suited to problems where we wish to compare multiple proposed sample sizes, when the proposed sample size is large, or when the health economic model is computationally expensive. Conclusions. As all the evaluated methods gave estimates similar to those given by traditional Monte Carlo, we suggest that EVSI can now be efficiently computed with confidence in realistic examples. No systematically superior EVSI computation method exists as the properties of the different methods depend on the underlying health economic model, data generation process, and user expertise.

Entities:  

Keywords:  computation methods; expected value of sample information; health economic decision modelling; study design; value of information

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32297840      PMCID: PMC7968749          DOI: 10.1177/0272989X20912402

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


  31 in total

1.  Determining the effective sample size of a parametric prior.

Authors:  Satoshi Morita; Peter F Thall; Peter Müller
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2007-08-30       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Dimensions of design space: a decision-theoretic approach to optimal research design.

Authors:  Stefano Conti; Karl Claxton
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2009-07-15       Impact factor: 2.583

3.  A Gaussian Approximation Approach for Value of Information Analysis.

Authors:  Hawre Jalal; Fernando Alarid-Escudero
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2017-07-22       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  The Curve of Optimal Sample Size (COSS): A Graphical Representation of the Optimal Sample Size from a Value of Information Analysis.

Authors:  Eric Jutkowitz; Fernando Alarid-Escudero; Karen M Kuntz; Hawre Jalal
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Cost-effectiveness of tapentadol prolonged release compared with oxycodone controlled release in the UK in patients with severe non-malignant chronic pain who failed 1st line treatment with morphine.

Authors:  Robert Ikenberg; Nadine Hertel; R Andrew Moore; Marko Obradovic; Garth Baxter; Pete Conway; Hiltrud Liedgens
Journal:  J Med Econ       Date:  2012-03-28       Impact factor: 2.448

6.  Efficient Monte Carlo Estimation of the Expected Value of Sample Information Using Moment Matching.

Authors:  Anna Heath; Ioanna Manolopoulou; Gianluca Baio
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2017-11-10       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  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

8.  Expected value of sample information for Weibull survival data.

Authors:  Alan Brennan; Samer A Kharroubi
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.046

9.  Nonidentifiability in Model Calibration and Implications for Medical Decision Making.

Authors:  Fernando Alarid-Escudero; Richard F MacLehose; Yadira Peralta; Karen M Kuntz; Eva A Enns
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  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

View more
  11 in total

1.  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

2.  A guide to value of information methods for prioritising research in health impact modelling.

Authors:  Christopher Jackson; Robert Johnson; Audrey de Nazelle; Rahul Goel; Thiago Hérick de Sá; Marko Tainio; James Woodcock
Journal:  Epidemiol Methods       Date:  2021-11-15

3.  Building a trusted framework for uncertainty assessment in rare diseases: suggestions for improvement (Response to "TRUST4RD: tool for reducing uncertainties in the evidence generation for specialised treatments for rare diseases").

Authors:  Sabine E Grimm; Xavier Pouwels; Bram L T Ramaekers; Ben Wijnen; Saskia Knies; Janneke Grutters; Manuela A Joore
Journal:  Orphanet J Rare Dis       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 4.123

4.  Expected Value of Sample Information to Guide the Design of Group Sequential Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Laura Flight; Steven Julious; Alan Brennan; Susan Todd
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Emerging Therapies for COVID-19: The Value of Information From More Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Stijntje W Dijk; Eline M Krijkamp; Natalia Kunst; Cary P Gross; John B Wong; M G Myriam Hunink
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 5.101

6.  Calculating Expected Value of Sample Information Adjusting for Imperfect Implementation.

Authors:  Anna Heath
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2022-01-16       Impact factor: 2.749

7.  An Efficient Method for Computing Expected Value of Sample Information for Survival Data from an Ongoing Trial.

Authors:  Mathyn Vervaart; Mark Strong; Karl P Claxton; Nicky J Welton; Torbjørn Wisløff; Eline Aas
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2021-12-30       Impact factor: 2.749

8.  Using decision analysis to support implementation planning in research and practice.

Authors:  Natalie Riva Smith; Kathleen E Knocke; Kristen Hassmiller Lich
Journal:  Implement Sci Commun       Date:  2022-07-30

9.  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

10.  Prioritisation and design of clinical trials.

Authors:  Anna Heath; M G Myriam Hunink; Eline Krijkamp; Petros Pechlivanoglou
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2021-06-06       Impact factor: 8.082

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.