Microsimulation Estimates of Decision Uncertainty and Value of Information Are Biased but Consistent.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Medical Decision Making Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-25 DOI:10.1177/0272989X241305414
Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert, Hawre Jalal, Fernando Alarid-Escudero
{"title":"Microsimulation Estimates of Decision Uncertainty and Value of Information Are Biased but Consistent.","authors":"Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert, Hawre Jalal, Fernando Alarid-Escudero","doi":"10.1177/0272989X241305414","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Individual-level state-transition microsimulations (iSTMs) have proliferated for economic evaluations in place of cohort state transition models (cSTMs). Probabilistic economic evaluations quantify decision uncertainty and value of information (VOI). Previous studies show that iSTMs provide unbiased estimates of expected incremental net monetary benefits (EINMB), but statistical properties of iSTM-produced estimates of decision uncertainty and VOI remain uncharacterized.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compare iSTM-produced estimates of decision uncertainty and VOI to corresponding cSTMs. For a 2-alternative decision and normally distributed incremental costs and benefits, we derive analytical expressions for the probability of being cost-effective and the expected value of perfect information (EVPI) for cSTMs and iSTMs, accounting for correlations in incremental outcomes at the population and individual levels. We use numerical simulations to illustrate our findings and explore the impact of relaxing normality assumptions or having >2 decision alternatives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>iSTM estimates of decision uncertainty and VOI are biased but asymptotically consistent (i.e., bias approaches 0 as number of microsimulated individuals approaches infinity). Decision uncertainty depends on 1 tail of the INMB distribution (e.g., P[INMB <0]), which depends on estimated variance (larger with iSTMs given first-order noise). While iSTMs overestimate EVPI, their direction of bias for the probability of being cost-effective is ambiguous. Bias is larger when uncertainties in incremental costs and effects are negatively correlated since this increases INMB variance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>iSTMs are useful for probabilistic economic evaluations. While more samples at the population uncertainty level are interchangeable with more microsimulations for estimating EINMB, minimizing iSTM bias in estimating decision uncertainty and VOI depends on sufficient microsimulations. Analysts should account for this when allocating their computational budgets and, at minimum, characterize such bias in their reported results.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>Individual-level state-transition microsimulation models (iSTMs) produce biased but consistent estimates of the probability that interventions are cost-effective.iSTMs also produce biased but consistent estimates of the expected value of perfect information.The biases in these decision uncertainty and value-of-information measures are not reduced by more parameter sets being sampled from their population-level uncertainty distribution but rather by more individuals being microsimulated for each parameter set sampled.Analysts using iSTMs to quantify decision uncertainty and value of information should account for these biases when allocating their computational budgets and, at minimum, characterize such bias in their reported results.</p>","PeriodicalId":49839,"journal":{"name":"Medical Decision Making","volume":" ","pages":"127-142"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X241305414","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Individual-level state-transition microsimulations (iSTMs) have proliferated for economic evaluations in place of cohort state transition models (cSTMs). Probabilistic economic evaluations quantify decision uncertainty and value of information (VOI). Previous studies show that iSTMs provide unbiased estimates of expected incremental net monetary benefits (EINMB), but statistical properties of iSTM-produced estimates of decision uncertainty and VOI remain uncharacterized.

Methods: We compare iSTM-produced estimates of decision uncertainty and VOI to corresponding cSTMs. For a 2-alternative decision and normally distributed incremental costs and benefits, we derive analytical expressions for the probability of being cost-effective and the expected value of perfect information (EVPI) for cSTMs and iSTMs, accounting for correlations in incremental outcomes at the population and individual levels. We use numerical simulations to illustrate our findings and explore the impact of relaxing normality assumptions or having >2 decision alternatives.

Results: iSTM estimates of decision uncertainty and VOI are biased but asymptotically consistent (i.e., bias approaches 0 as number of microsimulated individuals approaches infinity). Decision uncertainty depends on 1 tail of the INMB distribution (e.g., P[INMB <0]), which depends on estimated variance (larger with iSTMs given first-order noise). While iSTMs overestimate EVPI, their direction of bias for the probability of being cost-effective is ambiguous. Bias is larger when uncertainties in incremental costs and effects are negatively correlated since this increases INMB variance.

Conclusions: iSTMs are useful for probabilistic economic evaluations. While more samples at the population uncertainty level are interchangeable with more microsimulations for estimating EINMB, minimizing iSTM bias in estimating decision uncertainty and VOI depends on sufficient microsimulations. Analysts should account for this when allocating their computational budgets and, at minimum, characterize such bias in their reported results.

Highlights: Individual-level state-transition microsimulation models (iSTMs) produce biased but consistent estimates of the probability that interventions are cost-effective.iSTMs also produce biased but consistent estimates of the expected value of perfect information.The biases in these decision uncertainty and value-of-information measures are not reduced by more parameter sets being sampled from their population-level uncertainty distribution but rather by more individuals being microsimulated for each parameter set sampled.Analysts using iSTMs to quantify decision uncertainty and value of information should account for these biases when allocating their computational budgets and, at minimum, characterize such bias in their reported results.

微观模拟对决策不确定性和信息价值的估计是有偏差的,但是一致的。
目的:个体层面的状态转移微观模拟(istm)已经取代了队列状态转移模型(cSTMs),用于经济评估。概率经济评价量化决策不确定性和信息价值。先前的研究表明,istm提供了预期增量净货币收益(EINMB)的无偏估计,但istm产生的决策不确定性和VOI估计的统计特性仍未表征。方法:我们将istm产生的决策不确定性和VOI估计值与相应的cstm进行比较。对于两种选择决策和正态分布的增量成本和收益,我们推导了成本效益概率和cstm和istm的完美信息期望值(EVPI)的分析表达式,考虑了群体和个人水平上增量结果的相关性。我们使用数值模拟来说明我们的发现,并探讨放松正态性假设或拥有bbb20决策选择的影响。结果:iSTM对决策不确定性和VOI的估计是有偏差的,但渐近一致(即,当微模拟个体的数量接近无穷大时,偏差接近0)。决策不确定性取决于INMB分布的1个尾部(例如,P[INMB])。结论:istm对于概率经济评估是有用的。虽然在总体不确定性水平上更多的样本与更多的微模拟可以互换用于估计EINMB,但最小化估计决策不确定性和VOI的iSTM偏差取决于足够的微模拟。分析师在分配计算预算时应该考虑到这一点,至少在报告结果中描述这种偏差。重点:个人层面的状态转移微观模拟模型(istm)对干预措施具有成本效益的概率产生了有偏差但一致的估计。istm也会对完美信息的期望值做出有偏差但一致的估计。这些决策不确定性和信息价值度量的偏差不是通过从总体水平的不确定性分布中采样更多的参数集来减少的,而是通过对每个采样参数集进行更多的个体微观模拟来减少的。使用istm来量化决策不确定性和信息价值的分析人员在分配计算预算时应该考虑到这些偏差,至少在报告结果中描述这些偏差。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Decision Making
Medical Decision Making 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
146
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Decision Making offers rigorous and systematic approaches to decision making that are designed to improve the health and clinical care of individuals and to assist with health care policy development. Using the fundamentals of decision analysis and theory, economic evaluation, and evidence based quality assessment, Medical Decision Making presents both theoretical and practical statistical and modeling techniques and methods from a variety of disciplines.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信