Some Health States Are Better Than Others: Using Health State Rank Order to Improve Probabilistic Analyses

被引:23
作者
Goldhaber-Fiebert, Jeremy D. [1 ,2 ]
Jalal, Hawre J. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Ctr Hlth Policy, Stanford Hlth Policy, 117 Encina Commons, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Dept Med, Ctr Primary Care & Outcomes Res, 117 Encina Commons, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[3] Univ Pittsburgh, Hlth Policy & Management, Pittsburgh, PA USA
关键词
probabilistic sensitivity analysis; joint distribution; parameter correlation; value of information; expected value of partial perfect information; bias; correlated parameters; CHRONIC HEPATITIS-C; COST-EFFECTIVENESS; SENSITIVITY-ANALYSIS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; CALIBRATED MODEL; DECISION-MAKING; EXPECTED VALUE; RISK; INFORMATION; DISTRIBUTIONS;
D O I
10.1177/0272989X15605091
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) may lead policy makers to take nonoptimal actions due to misestimates of decision uncertainty caused by ignoring correlations. We developed a method to establish joint uncertainty distributions of quality-of-life (QoL) weights exploiting ordinal preferences over health states. Methods. Our method takes as inputs independent, univariate marginal distributions for each QoL weight and a preference ordering. It establishes a correlation matrix between QoL weights intended to preserve the ordering. It samples QoL weight values from their distributions, ordering them with the correlation matrix. It calculates the proportion of samples violating the ordering, iteratively adjusting the correlation matrix until this proportion is below an arbitrarily small threshold. We compare our method with the uncorrelated method and other methods for preserving rank ordering in terms of violation proportions and fidelity to the specified marginal distributions along with PSA and expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI) estimates, using 2 models: 1) a decision tree with 2 decision alternatives and 2) a chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) Markov model with 3 alternatives. Results. All methods make tradeoffs between violating preference orderings and altering marginal distributions. For both models, our method simultaneously performed best, with largest performance advantages when distributions reflected wider uncertainty. For PSA, larger changes to the marginal distributions induced by existing methods resulted in differing conclusions about which strategy was most likely optimal. For EVPPI, both preference order violations and altered marginal distributions caused existing methods to misestimate the maximum value of seeking additional information, sometimes concluding that there was no value. Conclusions. Analysts can characterize the joint uncertainty in QoL weights to improve PSA and value-of-information estimates using Open Source implementations of our method.
引用
收藏
页码:927 / 940
页数:14
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]   Expected value of sample information calculations in medical decision modeling [J].
Ades, AE ;
Lu, G ;
Claxton, K .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2004, 24 (02) :207-227
[2]   Correlations between parameters in risk models: Estimation and propagation of uncertainty by Markov Chain Monte Carlo [J].
Ades, AE ;
Lu, G .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2003, 23 (06) :1165-1172
[3]  
BRENNAN A, 2002, 24 ANN M SOC MED DEC
[4]  
Briggs A., 2006, DECISION MODELLING H
[5]   Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models [J].
Briggs, AH .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2000, 17 (05) :479-500
[6]   Model Parameter Estimation and Uncertainty Analysis: A Report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force Working Group-6 [J].
Briggs, Andrew H. ;
Weinstein, Milton C. ;
Fenwick, Elisabeth A. L. ;
Karnon, Jonathan ;
Sculpher, Mark J. ;
Paltiel, A. David .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2012, 32 (05) :722-732
[7]   Modeling Good Research Practices-Overview: A Report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-1 [J].
Caro, J. Jaime ;
Briggs, Andrew H. ;
Siebert, Uwe ;
Kuntz, Karen M. .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2012, 32 (05) :667-677
[8]   Correlations in uncertainty analysis for medical decision making: An application to heart-valve replacement [J].
Chessa, AG ;
Dekker, R ;
van Vliet, B ;
Steyerberg, EW ;
Habbema, JDF .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 1999, 19 (03) :276-286
[9]   When is evidence sufficient? [J].
Claxton, K ;
Cohen, JT ;
Neumann, PJ .
HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2005, 24 (01) :93-101
[10]   The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies [J].
Claxton, K .
JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 1999, 18 (03) :341-364