Literature DB >> 3831638

Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation. A practical approach.

P Doubilet, C B Begg, M C Weinstein, P Braun, B J McNeil.   

Abstract

The data for medical decision analyses are often unreliable. Traditional sensitivity analysis--varying one or more probability or utility estimates from baseline values to see if the optimal strategy changes--is cumbersome if more than two values are allowed to vary concurrently. This paper describes a practical method for probabilistic sensitivity analysis, in which uncertainties in all values are considered simultaneously. The uncertainty in each probability and utility is assumed to possess a probability distribution. For ease of application we have used a parametric model that permits each distribution to be specified by two values: the baseline estimate and a bound (upper or lower) of the 95 percent confidence interval. Following multiple simulations of the decision tree in which each probability and utility is randomly assigned a value within its distribution, the following results are recorded: (a) the mean and standard deviation of the expected utility of each strategy; (b) the frequency with which each strategy is optimal; (c) the frequency with which each strategy "buys" or "costs" a specified amount of utility relative to the remaining strategies. As illustrated by an application to a previously published decision analysis, this technique is easy to use and can be a valuable addition to the armamentarium of the decision analyst.

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 3831638     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X8500500205

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


  195 in total

1.  What is heartburn worth? A cost-utility analysis of management strategies.

Authors:  G R Heudebert; R M Centor; J C Klapow; R Marks; L Johnson; C M Wilcox
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Modeling the cost and outcomes of pharmacist-prescribed emergency contraception.

Authors:  K D Marciante; J S Gardner; D L Veenstra; S D Sullivan
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 3.  Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models.

Authors:  A H Briggs
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  The use of meta-analysis in cost-effectiveness analysis. Issues and recommendations.

Authors:  S Saint; D L Veenstra; S D Sullivan
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 5.  Cost-effectiveness of hip protectors in institutional dwelling elderly.

Authors:  Lisa Waldegger; Ann Cranney; Malcolm Man-Son-Hing; Doug Coyle
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-04-10       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Cost-effectiveness of automated external defibrillator deployment in selected public locations.

Authors:  Peter Cram; Sandeep Vijan; A Mark Fendrick
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Incorporation of statistical uncertainty in health economic modelling studies using second-order Monte Carlo simulations.

Authors:  Mark J C Nuijten
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  The long-term benefits of genotypic resistance testing in patients with extensive prior antiretroviral therapy: a model-based approach.

Authors:  Y Yazdanpanah; M Vray; J Meynard; E Losina; M C Weinstein; L Morand-Joubert; S J Goldie; H E Hsu; R P Walensky; C Dalban; P E Sax; P M Girard; K A Freedberg
Journal:  HIV Med       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 3.180

9.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lesinurad/Allopurinol Versus Febuxostat for the Management of Gout/Hyperuricemia in Italy.

Authors:  M Ruggeri; M Basile; C Drago; F R Rolli; A Cicchetti
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  The use of z scores in probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Authors:  Daniel P Schauer; Mark H Eckman
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 2.583

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.