ReviewPharmacoEconomics2009
Calibration methods used in cancer simulation models and suggested reporting guidelines.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
82 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Microsimulation Models in Cardiometabolic Disease: Model Calibration and Validation.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Pooled it
- Cervical cancer screening in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review of economic evaluation studies.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2022Pooled it
- Calibration of individual-based models to epidemiological data: A systematic review.PLoS computational biology · 2020Pooled it
- Simple but not simpler: a systematic review of Markov models for economic evaluation of cervical cancer screening.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2018Pooled it
- Methods for Health Economic Evaluation of Vaccines and Immunization Decision Frameworks: A Consensus Framework from a European Vaccine Economics Community.PharmacoEconomics · 2016Pooled it
- Do economic evaluations of targeted therapy provide support for decision makers?The American journal of managed care · 2011Pooled it
- An updated natural history model of cervical cancer: derivation of model parameters.American journal of epidemiology · 2014Trial
- Validation and calibration of a computer simulation model of pediatric HIV infection.PloS one · 2013Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of organised versus opportunistic mammography breast cancer screening in low-resourced country.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Impact of enhanced practices on opioid overdose deaths: A community-based modeling approach.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of community-based interventions for reducing opioid overdose and non-overdose deaths: simulation modeling of HEALing Communities Study.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Ten Recommendations for Modelling Cost Effectiveness of Screening: Perspectives of an International Stakeholder Group.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Review
- Discrete-Event Simulation Modeling Framework for Cancer Interventions and Population Health in R (DESCIPHR): An Open-Source Pipeline.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- Evaluating Cost-Effectiveness of 85 Endoscopic Surveillance Strategies of Nondysplastic Barrett's Esophagus.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- A Scoping Review on Calibration Methods for Cancer Simulation Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025Article
- Modeling the Impact of Multicancer Early Detection Tests: A Review of Natural History of Disease Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025Review
- Calibration of transmission-dynamic infectious disease models: A scoping review and reporting framework.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Natural history models for lung Cancer: A scoping review.Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Mathematical Modeling to Address Questions in Breast Cancer Screening: An Overview of the Breast Cancer Models of the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network.Journal of breast imaging · 2025Review
22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Increasingly, computer simulation models are used for economic and policy evaluation in cancer prevention and control. A model's predictions of key outcomes, such as screening effectiveness, depend on the values of unobservable natural history parameters. Calibration is the process of determining the values of unobservable parameters by constraining model output to replicate observed data. Because there are many approaches for model calibration and little consensus on best practices, we surveyed the literature to catalogue the use and reporting of these methods in cancer simulation models. We conducted a MEDLINE search (1980 through 2006) for articles on cancer-screening models and supplemented search results with articles from our personal reference databases. For each article, two authors independently abstracted pre-determined items using a standard form. Data items included cancer site, model type, methods used for determination of unobservable parameter values and description of any calibration protocol. All authors reached consensus on items of disagreement. Reviews and non-cancer models were excluded. Articles describing analytical models, which estimate parameters with statistical approaches (e.g. maximum likelihood) were catalogued separately. Models that included unobservable parameters were analysed and classified by whether calibration methods were reported and if so, the methods used. The review process yielded 154 articles that met our inclusion criteria and, of these, we concluded that 131 may have used calibration methods to determine model parameters. Although the term 'calibration' was not always used, descriptions of calibration or 'model fitting' were found in 50% (n = 66) of the articles, with an additional 16% (n = 21) providing a reference to methods. Calibration target data were identified in nearly all of these articles. Other methodological details, such as the goodness-of-fit metric, were discussed in 54% (n = 47 of 87) of the articles reporting calibration methods, while few details were provided on the algorithms used to search the parameter space. Our review shows that the use of cancer simulation modelling is increasing, although thorough descriptions of calibration procedures are rare in the published literature for these models. Calibration is a key component of model development and is central to the validity and credibility of subsequent analyses and inferences drawn from model predictions. To aid peer-review and facilitate discussion of modelling methods, we propose a standardized Calibration Reporting Checklist for model documentation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.