Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21602487›Full record

ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making

A framework for addressing structural uncertainty in decision models.

Christopher H Jackson, Laura Bojke, Simon G Thompson, Karl Claxton, Linda D Sharples

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
23.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Calculating the Expected Net Benefit of Sampling for Survival Data: A Tutorial and Case Study.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024
    Article
  10. Analyzing quality of life among people with opioid use disorder from the National Institute on Drug Abuse Data Share initiative: implications for decision making.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. An Efficient Method for Computing Expected Value of Sample Information for Survival Data from an Ongoing Trial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022
    Article
  15. Value of Information Analysis in Models to Inform Health Policy.Annual review of statistics and its application · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Predicting the Effectiveness of Endemic Infectious Disease Control Interventions: The Impact of Mass Action versus Network Model Structure.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. An Evaluation of Survival Curve Extrapolation Techniques Using Long-Term Observational Cancer Data.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher H JacksonMRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK (CHJ, SGT, LDS)
Laura BojkeCentre for Health Economics, University of York, UK (LB, KC)
Simon G ThompsonMRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK (CHJ, SGT, LDS)
Karl ClaxtonCentre for Health Economics, University of York, UK (LB, KC)
Linda D SharplesMRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK (CHJ, SGT, LDS)
University of York · GBMRC Biostatistics Unit · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation RG/08/014/24067Medical Research Council MC_U105232027Medical Research Council MC_U105260792Medical Research Council MC_U145079308Medical Research Council U.1052.00.001Medical Research Council U.1052.00.008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Decision analytic models used for health technology assessment are subject to uncertainties. These uncertainties can be quantified probabilistically, by placing distributions on model parameters and simulating from these to generate estimates of cost-effectiveness. However, many uncertain model choices, often termed structural assumptions, are usually only explored informally by presenting estimates of cost-effectiveness under alternative scenarios. The authors show how 2 recent research proposals represent parts of a framework to formally account for all common structural uncertainties. First, the model is expanded to include parameters that encompass all possible structural choices. Uncertainty can then arise because these parameters are estimated imprecisely from data, for example, a treatment effect of doubtful significance. Uncertainty can also arise if there are no relevant data. If there are relevant data, uncertainty can be addressed by averaging expected costs and effects generated from probabilistic analysis of the models with and without the parameter. The weights used for averaging are related to the predictive ability of each model, assessed against the data. If there are no data, additional parameters can often be informed by eliciting expert beliefs as probability distributions. These ideas are illustrated in decision models for antiplatelet therapies for vascular disease and new biologic drugs for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesUncertaintyCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansQuality-Adjusted Life Years

Identifiers

PMID21602487
OpenAlexW1995882043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.