Literature DB >> 3849380

The MISCAN simulation program for the evaluation of screening for disease.

J D Habbema, G J van Oortmarssen, J T Lubbe, P J van der Maas.   

Abstract

The computer program MISCAN is developed for use in evaluation of mass screening for disease. The program uses Monte Carlo simulation. It produces output on the results of screening projects and on the effects of screening on morbidity and mortality on the individual and population level. The calculations are based on models of the natural history of the disease and of the impact of screening on the natural history. The approach is such that considerable flexibility exists in specifying the structure of the model and its parameters. The program consists of two parts. The DISEASE part can be used for simulating the epidemiology of the disease when no screening is taking place; it requires input on the population and on the disease process. The SCREENING part is to be used in combination with the DISEASE part. It is intended for simulation of the results and effects of a screening project. It requires input on the properties of the screening tests, the consequences of early detection by screening, and the policy (ages and intervals between screens) of the project. MISCAN can be used for finding model assumptions regarding the disease process and the impact of screening that give a good explanation of the observed results of a screening project. Such an analysis proceeds in two steps. First, MISCAN is used to calculate simulated results of the project, based on specific assumptions. Next, these results are tested against the observed results, in order to assess the acceptability of the assumptions. MISCAN can also be used for optimization of the screening policy by simulating the cost and benefit components of a large number of different screening policies.

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 3849380     DOI: 10.1016/0169-2607(85)90048-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed        ISSN: 0169-2607            Impact factor:   5.428


  25 in total

Review 1.  Selecting a decision model for economic evaluation: a case study and review.

Authors:  J Karnon; J Brown
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  1998-10

2.  Assessing the effectiveness of health interventions for cost-effectiveness analysis. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine.

Authors:  J S Mandelblatt; D G Fryback; M C Weinstein; L B Russell; M R Gold
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 3.  Dynamic microsimulation models for health outcomes: a review.

Authors:  Carolyn M Rutter; Alan M Zaslavsky; Eric J Feuer
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2010-05-18       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  The predicted and observed decline in onchocerciasis infection during 14 years of successful control of Simulium spp. in west Africa.

Authors:  J Remme; G De Sole; G J van Oortmarssen
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 9.408

5.  Tumour doubling times and the length bias in breast cancer screening programmes.

Authors:  Israel T Vieira; Valter de Senna; Paul R Harper; Arjan K Shahani
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  2011-03-29

6.  Keeping the noise down: common random numbers for disease simulation modeling.

Authors:  Natasha K Stout; Sue J Goldie
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  2008-12

7.  Simulating the Impact of Risk-Based Screening and Treatment on Breast Cancer Outcomes with MISCAN-Fadia.

Authors:  Jeroen J van den Broek; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Eveline A Heijnsdijk; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 2.583

8.  Chapter 7: Description of MISCAN-lung, the Erasmus MC Lung Cancer microsimulation model for evaluating cancer control interventions.

Authors:  F W Schultz; R Boer; H J de Koning
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 4.000

9.  Multicohort models in cost-effectiveness analysis: why aggregating estimates over multiple cohorts can hide useful information.

Authors:  James F O'Mahony; Joost van Rosmalen; Ann G Zauber; Marjolein van Ballegooijen
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2012-08-27       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  Variation in Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing Rates and Prostate Cancer Treatments and Outcomes in a National 20-Year Cohort.

Authors:  Oskar Bergengren; Marcus Westerberg; Lars Holmberg; Pär Stattin; Anna Bill-Axelson; Hans Garmo
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2021-05-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.