实施和解释概率分析结果的方法指南。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Xuanqian Xie, Alexis K Schaink, Olga Gajic-Veljanoski, Man Wah Yeung, Myra Wang, Chunmei Li, Wendy J Ungar
{"title":"实施和解释概率分析结果的方法指南。","authors":"Xuanqian Xie, Alexis K Schaink, Olga Gajic-Veljanoski, Man Wah Yeung, Myra Wang, Chunmei Li, Wendy J Ungar","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2024.2416255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Probabilistic analysis, also referred to as probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA), is used extensively in cost-effectiveness evaluations of health technologies. We present methodological guidance for implementing probabilistic analysis and interpreting its results for policy and decision-making.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We review the methodological issues related to common practices in probabilistic analysis, explore aspects that are currently not widely addressed in the health economics literature, and provide an overview of recent methodological developments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We use examples to highlight the advantages and disadvantages of common tools used for presenting probabilistic analysis results, including the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC), cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF), and value of information (VOI) analysis. We raise and address issues related to using Monte Carlo standard error to determine the number of iterations required, the implications of large uncertainty, and the credibility and meaningfulness of small differences in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We then discuss evolving methods in probabilistic analysis, cautious uses of probabilistic analysis, and factors impacting parameter uncertainty.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A deeper understanding of probabilistic analysis methods enables health economists and decision-makers to more effectively address and interpret parameter uncertainty in health economic evaluations, which is essential for making informed policy decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A methodological guide for implementing and interpreting results of probabilistic analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Xuanqian Xie, Alexis K Schaink, Olga Gajic-Veljanoski, Man Wah Yeung, Myra Wang, Chunmei Li, Wendy J Ungar\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14737167.2024.2416255\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Probabilistic analysis, also referred to as probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA), is used extensively in cost-effectiveness evaluations of health technologies. We present methodological guidance for implementing probabilistic analysis and interpreting its results for policy and decision-making.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We review the methodological issues related to common practices in probabilistic analysis, explore aspects that are currently not widely addressed in the health economics literature, and provide an overview of recent methodological developments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We use examples to highlight the advantages and disadvantages of common tools used for presenting probabilistic analysis results, including the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC), cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF), and value of information (VOI) analysis. We raise and address issues related to using Monte Carlo standard error to determine the number of iterations required, the implications of large uncertainty, and the credibility and meaningfulness of small differences in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We then discuss evolving methods in probabilistic analysis, cautious uses of probabilistic analysis, and factors impacting parameter uncertainty.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A deeper understanding of probabilistic analysis methods enables health economists and decision-makers to more effectively address and interpret parameter uncertainty in health economic evaluations, which is essential for making informed policy decisions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12244,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2024.2416255\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2024.2416255","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:概率分析又称概率敏感性分析(PSA),广泛应用于医疗技术的成本效益评估。我们提出了实施概率分析的方法指南,并为政策和决策解释其结果:方法:我们回顾了与概率分析中常见做法相关的方法问题,探讨了目前卫生经济学文献中尚未广泛涉及的方面,并概述了近期的方法发展:我们通过实例强调了用于展示概率分析结果的常用工具的优缺点,包括成本效益可接受性曲线(CEAC)、成本效益可接受性前沿(CEAF)和信息价值(VOI)分析。我们提出并讨论了与使用蒙特卡罗标准误差确定所需迭代次数、较大不确定性的影响以及质量调整生命年 (QALY) 的微小差异的可信度和意义有关的问题。然后,我们讨论了概率分析方法的演变、概率分析的谨慎使用以及影响参数不确定性的因素:对概率分析方法的深入理解使卫生经济学家和决策者能够更有效地处理和解释卫生经济评估中的参数不确定性,这对做出明智的决策至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A methodological guide for implementing and interpreting results of probabilistic analysis.

Introduction: Probabilistic analysis, also referred to as probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA), is used extensively in cost-effectiveness evaluations of health technologies. We present methodological guidance for implementing probabilistic analysis and interpreting its results for policy and decision-making.

Methods: We review the methodological issues related to common practices in probabilistic analysis, explore aspects that are currently not widely addressed in the health economics literature, and provide an overview of recent methodological developments.

Results: We use examples to highlight the advantages and disadvantages of common tools used for presenting probabilistic analysis results, including the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC), cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF), and value of information (VOI) analysis. We raise and address issues related to using Monte Carlo standard error to determine the number of iterations required, the implications of large uncertainty, and the credibility and meaningfulness of small differences in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We then discuss evolving methods in probabilistic analysis, cautious uses of probabilistic analysis, and factors impacting parameter uncertainty.

Conclusions: A deeper understanding of probabilistic analysis methods enables health economists and decision-makers to more effectively address and interpret parameter uncertainty in health economic evaluations, which is essential for making informed policy decisions.

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
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
×
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