Literature DB >> 8028413

Toward a peer review process for medical decision analysis models.

F A Sonnenberg1, M S Roberts, J Tsevat, J B Wong, M Barry, D L Kent.   

Abstract

This paper presents a framework for a peer review process for medical decision analysis models. This framework is based on the collective experience of the members of the Inter-PORT Decision Modeling work group, a team of decision analysis experts comprising members from each of the Patient Outcomes Research Teams (PORTs), sponsored by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. Important general principles of correct model structure include choice of model type, perspective of the analysis, choice of utility scheme and identification of strategies that should be included and events that should be modeled. In addition, a set of rules for correct decision model structure may help to identify common errors. Although not necessarily exhaustive, this scheme provides an approach by which a reviewer may judge the adequacy of a decision model presented for publication or as the basis for a health policy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8028413

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  16 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

Review 2.  Assessing quality in decision analytic cost-effectiveness models. A suggested framework and example of application.

Authors:  M Sculpher; E Fenwick; K Claxton
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Modelling in health economic evaluation. What is its place? What is its value?

Authors:  A Brennan; R Akehurst
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models.

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

Review 5.  Testing the validity of cost-effectiveness models.

Authors:  C McCabe; S Dixon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  The research-practice gap and the role of decision analysis in closing it.

Authors:  J Dowie
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  1996-02

Review 7.  Good practice guidelines for decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment: a review and consolidation of quality assessment.

Authors:  Zoë Philips; Laura Bojke; Mark Sculpher; Karl Claxton; Su Golder
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Avoiding and identifying errors and other threats to the credibility of health economic models.

Authors:  Paul Tappenden; James B Chilcott
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 9.  A systematic review of models used in cost-effectiveness analyses of preventing osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  L Si; T M Winzenberg; A J Palmer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2013-10-24       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Cost-effectiveness of palliation of unresectable esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Eduardo B da Silveira; Everson L Artifon
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2008-06-04       Impact factor: 3.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.