Literature DB >> 33733932

Comparison of Decision Modeling Approaches for Health Technology and Policy Evaluation.

John Graves1, Shawn Garbett2, Zilu Zhou3, Jonathan S Schildcrout4, Josh Peterson5.   

Abstract

We discuss tradeoffs and errors associated with approaches to modeling health economic decisions. Through an application in pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing to guide drug selection for individuals with a genetic variant, we assessed model accuracy, optimal decisions, and computation time for an identical decision scenario modeled 4 ways: using 1) coupled-time differential equations (DEQ), 2) a cohort-based discrete-time state transition model (MARKOV), 3) an individual discrete-time state transition microsimulation model (MICROSIM), and 4) discrete event simulation (DES). Relative to DEQ, the net monetary benefit for PGx testing (v. a reference strategy of no testing) based on MARKOV with rate-to-probability conversions using commonly used formulas resulted in different optimal decisions. MARKOV was nearly identical to DEQ when transition probabilities were embedded using a transition intensity matrix. Among stochastic models, DES model outputs converged to DEQ with substantially fewer simulated patients (1 million) v. MICROSIM (1 billion). Overall, properly embedded Markov models provided the most favorable mix of accuracy and runtime but introduced additional complexity for calculating cost and quality-adjusted life year outcomes due to the inclusion of "jumpover" states after proper embedding of transition probabilities. Among stochastic models, DES offered the most favorable mix of accuracy, reliability, and speed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  decision modeling; health economic methods; pharmacogenomics

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33733932      PMCID: PMC9181506          DOI: 10.1177/0272989X21995805

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.749


  27 in total

1.  A taxonomy of model structures for economic evaluation of health technologies.

Authors:  Alan Brennan; Stephen E Chick; Ruth Davies
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 2.  Modelling methods for pharmacoeconomics and health technology assessment: an overview and guide.

Authors:  James E Stahl
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Alternative Conversion Methods for Transition Probabilities in State-Transition Models: Validity and Impact on Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness.

Authors:  Beate Jahn; Christina Kurzthaler; Jagpreet Chhatwal; Elamin H Elbasha; Annette Conrads-Frank; Ursula Rochau; Gaby Sroczynski; Christoph Urach; Marvin Bundo; Niki Popper; Uwe Siebert
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2019-06-28       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  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

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

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

6.  Advantages and disadvantages of discrete-event simulation for health economic analyses.

Authors:  J Jaime Caro; Jörgen Möller
Journal:  Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2016-03-25       Impact factor: 2.217

7.  Multicriteria Decision Analysis to Support Health Technology Assessment Agencies: Benefits, Limitations, and the Way Forward.

Authors:  Rob Baltussen; Kevin Marsh; Praveen Thokala; Vakaramoko Diaby; Hector Castro; Irina Cleemput; Martina Garau; Georgi Iskrov; Alireza Olyaeemanesh; Andrew Mirelman; Mohammedreza Mobinizadeh; Alec Morton; Michele Tringali; Janine van Til; Joice Valentim; Monika Wagner; Sitaporn Youngkong; Vladimir Zah; Agnes Toll; Maarten Jansen; Leon Bijlmakers; Wija Oortwijn; Henk Broekhuizen
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2019-10-16       Impact factor: 5.725

Review 8.  Markov modeling and discrete event simulation in health care: a systematic comparison.

Authors:  Lachlan Standfield; Tracy Comans; Paul Scuffham
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2014-04-28       Impact factor: 2.188

9.  Estimation of markov chain transition probabilities and rates from fully and partially observed data: uncertainty propagation, evidence synthesis, and model calibration.

Authors:  Nicky J Welton; A E Ades
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2005 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  Priority setting of health interventions: the need for multi-criteria decision analysis.

Authors:  Rob Baltussen; Louis Niessen
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2006-08-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.