量化模型更新和分布适应参数重要性的方法。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
David Glynn, Susan Griffin, Nils Gutacker, Simon Walker
{"title":"量化模型更新和分布适应参数重要性的方法。","authors":"David Glynn, Susan Griffin, Nils Gutacker, Simon Walker","doi":"10.1177/0272989X241262037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Decision models are time-consuming to develop; therefore, adapting previously developed models for new purposes may be advantageous. We provide methods to prioritize efforts to 1) update parameter values in existing models and 2) adapt existing models for distributional cost-effectiveness analysis (DCEA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Methods exist to assess the influence of different input parameters on the results of a decision models, including value of information (VOI) and 1-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA). We apply 1) VOI to prioritize searches for additional information to update parameter values and 2) OWSA to prioritize searches for parameters that may vary by socioeconomic characteristics. We highlight the assumptions required and propose metrics that quantify the extent to which parameters in a model have been updated or adapted. We provide R code to quickly carry out the analysis given inputs from a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and demonstrate our methods using an oncology case study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In our case study, updating 2 of 21 probabilistic model parameters addressed 71.5% of the total VOI and updating 3 addressed approximately 100% of the uncertainty. Our proposed approach suggests that these are the 3 parameters that should be prioritized. For model adaptation for DCEA, 46.3% of the total OWSA variation came from a single parameter, while the top 10 input parameters were found to account for more than 95% of the total variation, suggesting efforts should be aimed toward these.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These methods offer a systematic approach to guide research efforts in updating models with new data or adapting models to undertake DCEA. The case study demonstrated only very small gains from updating more than 3 parameters or adapting more than 10 parameters.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>It can require considerable analyst time to search for evidence to update a model or to adapt a model to take account of equity concerns.In this article, we provide a quantitative method to prioritze parameters to 1) update existing models to reflect potential new evidence and 2) adapt existing models to estimate distributional outcomes.We define metrics that quantify the extent to which the parameters in a model have been updated or adapted.We provide R code that can quickly rank parameter importance and calculate quality metrics using only the results of a standard probabilistic sensitivity analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":49839,"journal":{"name":"Medical Decision Making","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methods to Quantify the Importance of Parameters for Model Updating and Distributional Adaptation.\",\"authors\":\"David Glynn, Susan Griffin, Nils Gutacker, Simon Walker\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0272989X241262037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Decision models are time-consuming to develop; therefore, adapting previously developed models for new purposes may be advantageous. We provide methods to prioritize efforts to 1) update parameter values in existing models and 2) adapt existing models for distributional cost-effectiveness analysis (DCEA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Methods exist to assess the influence of different input parameters on the results of a decision models, including value of information (VOI) and 1-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA). We apply 1) VOI to prioritize searches for additional information to update parameter values and 2) OWSA to prioritize searches for parameters that may vary by socioeconomic characteristics. We highlight the assumptions required and propose metrics that quantify the extent to which parameters in a model have been updated or adapted. We provide R code to quickly carry out the analysis given inputs from a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and demonstrate our methods using an oncology case study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In our case study, updating 2 of 21 probabilistic model parameters addressed 71.5% of the total VOI and updating 3 addressed approximately 100% of the uncertainty. Our proposed approach suggests that these are the 3 parameters that should be prioritized. For model adaptation for DCEA, 46.3% of the total OWSA variation came from a single parameter, while the top 10 input parameters were found to account for more than 95% of the total variation, suggesting efforts should be aimed toward these.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These methods offer a systematic approach to guide research efforts in updating models with new data or adapting models to undertake DCEA. The case study demonstrated only very small gains from updating more than 3 parameters or adapting more than 10 parameters.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>It can require considerable analyst time to search for evidence to update a model or to adapt a model to take account of equity concerns.In this article, we provide a quantitative method to prioritze parameters to 1) update existing models to reflect potential new evidence and 2) adapt existing models to estimate distributional outcomes.We define metrics that quantify the extent to which the parameters in a model have been updated or adapted.We provide R code that can quickly rank parameter importance and calculate quality metrics using only the results of a standard probabilistic sensitivity analysis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Decision Making\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-26\",\"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/10.1177/0272989X241262037\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X241262037","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:决策模型的开发非常耗时;因此,根据新的目的调整以前开发的模型可能更有优势。我们提供了一些方法来确定以下工作的优先次序:1)更新现有模型中的参数值;2)调整现有模型以用于分布式成本效益分析(DCEA):方法:现有方法可评估不同输入参数对决策模型结果的影响,包括信息价值(VOI)和单向敏感性分析(OWSA)。我们将 1) 信息价值分析用于优先搜索更多信息以更新参数值,2) 单向敏感性分析用于优先搜索可能因社会经济特征而变化的参数。我们强调了所需的假设,并提出了量化模型参数更新或调整程度的指标。我们提供了 R 代码,以便在概率敏感性分析(PSA)输入的情况下快速进行分析,并使用肿瘤学案例研究演示了我们的方法:在我们的案例研究中,更新 21 个概率模型参数中的 2 个参数可解决 71.5% 的总 VOI,更新 3 个参数可解决约 100% 的不确定性。我们提出的方法表明,这 3 个参数应优先考虑。对于 DCEA 的模型调整,OWSA 总变化的 46.3% 来自单个参数,而前 10 个输入参数占总变化的 95% 以上,这表明应将工作重点放在这些参数上:这些方法提供了一种系统方法,可指导研究工作,利用新数据更新模型或调整模型以进行 DCEA。案例研究表明,更新 3 个以上参数或调整 10 个以上参数的收益非常小:在本文中,我们提供了一种定量方法来确定参数的优先次序,以便 1) 更新现有模型以反映潜在的新证据;2) 调整现有模型以估计分布结果。我们定义了一些指标来量化模型中参数的更新或调整程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Methods to Quantify the Importance of Parameters for Model Updating and Distributional Adaptation.

Purpose: Decision models are time-consuming to develop; therefore, adapting previously developed models for new purposes may be advantageous. We provide methods to prioritize efforts to 1) update parameter values in existing models and 2) adapt existing models for distributional cost-effectiveness analysis (DCEA).

Methods: Methods exist to assess the influence of different input parameters on the results of a decision models, including value of information (VOI) and 1-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA). We apply 1) VOI to prioritize searches for additional information to update parameter values and 2) OWSA to prioritize searches for parameters that may vary by socioeconomic characteristics. We highlight the assumptions required and propose metrics that quantify the extent to which parameters in a model have been updated or adapted. We provide R code to quickly carry out the analysis given inputs from a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and demonstrate our methods using an oncology case study.

Results: In our case study, updating 2 of 21 probabilistic model parameters addressed 71.5% of the total VOI and updating 3 addressed approximately 100% of the uncertainty. Our proposed approach suggests that these are the 3 parameters that should be prioritized. For model adaptation for DCEA, 46.3% of the total OWSA variation came from a single parameter, while the top 10 input parameters were found to account for more than 95% of the total variation, suggesting efforts should be aimed toward these.

Conclusions: These methods offer a systematic approach to guide research efforts in updating models with new data or adapting models to undertake DCEA. The case study demonstrated only very small gains from updating more than 3 parameters or adapting more than 10 parameters.

Highlights: It can require considerable analyst time to search for evidence to update a model or to adapt a model to take account of equity concerns.In this article, we provide a quantitative method to prioritze parameters to 1) update existing models to reflect potential new evidence and 2) adapt existing models to estimate distributional outcomes.We define metrics that quantify the extent to which the parameters in a model have been updated or adapted.We provide R code that can quickly rank parameter importance and calculate quality metrics using only the results of a standard probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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