Informing Structural Assumptions for Three State Oncology Cost-Effectiveness Models through Model Efficiency and Fit.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-21 DOI:10.1007/s40258-024-00884-2
Dominic Muston
{"title":"Informing Structural Assumptions for Three State Oncology Cost-Effectiveness Models through Model Efficiency and Fit.","authors":"Dominic Muston","doi":"10.1007/s40258-024-00884-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The characteristics and relative strengths and weaknesses of partitioned survival models (PSMs) and state transition models (STMs) for three state oncology cost-effectiveness models have previously been studied. Despite clear and longstanding economic modeling guidelines, more than one structure is rarely presented, and the choice of structure appears correlated more with audience or precedent than disease, decision problem, or available data. One reason may be a lack of guidance and tools available to readily compare measures of internal validity such as the model fit and efficiency of different structures, or sensitivity of results to those choices. To address this gap, methods are presented to evaluate the fit and efficiency of three structures, with an accompanying R software package, psm3mkv. The methods are illustrated by analyzing interim and final analysis datasets of the KEYNOTE-826 randomized controlled trial. At both interim and final analyses, the STM Clock Reset structure provided the best and most efficient fit. Structural uncertainties had been reduced from interim to final analysis. Beyond measures of internal validity, guidelines highlight the importance of reflecting all available data, avoiding model selection purely on the basis of goodness of fit and strongly considering external validity. The method and software allow modelers to more easily evaluate and report model fit and efficiency, examine implicit assumptions, and reveal sensitivities to structural choices.</p>","PeriodicalId":8065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-024-00884-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The characteristics and relative strengths and weaknesses of partitioned survival models (PSMs) and state transition models (STMs) for three state oncology cost-effectiveness models have previously been studied. Despite clear and longstanding economic modeling guidelines, more than one structure is rarely presented, and the choice of structure appears correlated more with audience or precedent than disease, decision problem, or available data. One reason may be a lack of guidance and tools available to readily compare measures of internal validity such as the model fit and efficiency of different structures, or sensitivity of results to those choices. To address this gap, methods are presented to evaluate the fit and efficiency of three structures, with an accompanying R software package, psm3mkv. The methods are illustrated by analyzing interim and final analysis datasets of the KEYNOTE-826 randomized controlled trial. At both interim and final analyses, the STM Clock Reset structure provided the best and most efficient fit. Structural uncertainties had been reduced from interim to final analysis. Beyond measures of internal validity, guidelines highlight the importance of reflecting all available data, avoiding model selection purely on the basis of goodness of fit and strongly considering external validity. The method and software allow modelers to more easily evaluate and report model fit and efficiency, examine implicit assumptions, and reveal sensitivities to structural choices.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过模型效率和拟合度为三个州肿瘤成本效益模型的结构假设提供依据。
以前曾对三种状态肿瘤学成本效益模型中的分区生存模型(PSM)和状态转换模型(STM)的特点和相对优缺点进行过研究。尽管长期以来一直有明确的经济建模指导原则,但很少有人提出一种以上的结构,而且结构的选择似乎更多地与受众或先例相关,而不是与疾病、决策问题或可用数据相关。其中一个原因可能是缺乏指导和工具,无法随时比较内部有效性的衡量标准,如不同结构的模型拟合度和效率,或结果对这些选择的敏感性。为了弥补这一不足,本文介绍了评估三种结构的拟合度和效率的方法,以及配套的 R 软件包 psm3mkv。我们通过分析 KEYNOTE-826 随机对照试验的中期和最终分析数据集来说明这些方法。在中期和最终分析中,STM 时钟重置结构提供了最佳和最有效的拟合。从中期分析到最终分析,结构的不确定性都有所降低。除了衡量内部有效性之外,指南还强调了反映所有可用数据的重要性,避免纯粹根据拟合度选择模型,并着重考虑外部有效性。该方法和软件使建模人员能够更轻松地评估和报告模型的拟合度和效率,检查隐含假设,并揭示结构选择的敏感性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy provides timely publication of cutting-edge research and expert opinion from this increasingly important field, making it a vital resource for payers, providers and researchers alike. The journal includes high quality economic research and reviews of all aspects of healthcare from various perspectives and countries, designed to communicate the latest applied information in health economics and health policy. While emphasis is placed on information with practical applications, a strong basis of underlying scientific rigor is maintained.
期刊最新文献
Social Costs of Smoking in the Czech Republic. Economic Evaluations of Robotic-Assisted Surgery: Methods, Challenges and Opportunities. Onasemnogene Abeparvovec Gene Therapy and Risdiplam for the Treatment of Spinal Muscular Atrophy in Thailand: A Cost-Utility Analysis. The Impact of the Approach to Accounting for Age and Sex in Economic Models on Predicted Quality-Adjusted Life-Years. Measuring the Impact of Medical Cannabis Law Adoption on Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance Costs: A Difference-in-Difference Analysis, 2003–2022
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1