ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2013
Value-of-information analysis within a stakeholder-driven research prioritization process in a US setting: an application in cancer genomics.
Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Are Evidence Standards Different for Genomic- vs. Clinical-Based Precision Medicine? A Quantitative Analysis of Individualized Warfarin Therapy.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2017Pooled it
- Constructing Relative Effect Priors for Research Prioritization and Trial Design: A Meta-epidemiological Analysis.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2023Article
- Article
- Value of Information Analysis: Are We There Yet?PharmacoEconomics - open · 2021Article
- How can clinical researchers quantify the value of their proposed comparative research?American heart journal · 2019Article
- Optimal Information Collection Policies in a Markov Decision Process Framework.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2018Article
- Integrating value of research into NCI Clinical Trials Cooperative Group research review and prioritization: A pilot study.Cancer medicine · 2018Article
- The premarket assessment of the cost-effectiveness of a predictive technology "Straticyte™" for the early detection of oral cancer: a decision analytic model.Health economics review · 2017Article
- Burden of illness and research investments in translational sciences for pharmaceuticals in metastatic cancers.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2017Article
- Development and Evaluation of an Approach to Using Value of Information Analyses for Real-Time Prioritization Decisions Within SWOG, a Large Cancer Clinical Trials Cooperative Group.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2016Article
- Value of Information: A Tool to Improve Research Prioritization and Reduce Waste.PLoS medicine · 2015Article
- Squaring the circle: a priority-setting method for evidence-based service development, reconciling research with multiple stakeholder views.BMC health services research · 2015Article
- Quantitative benefit-harm assessment for setting research priorities: the example of roflumilast for patients with COPD.BMC medicine · 2015Article
- Article
- Multilevel modeling and value of information in clinical trial decision support.BMC systems biology · 2014Article
- Analysing coverage decision-making: opening Pandora's box?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2014Article
- Economic analyses of genetic tests in personalized medicine: clinical utility first, then cost utility.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2014Article
- Value of Information Analysis Informing Adoption and Research Decisions in a Portfolio of Health Care Interventions.MDM policy & practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and outcomes of incorporating value-of-information (VOI) analysis into a stakeholder-driven research prioritization process in a US-based setting.
methods. Within a program to prioritize comparative effectiveness research areas in cancer genomics, over a period of 7 months, we developed decision-analytic models and calculated upper-bound VOI estimates for 3 previously selected genomic tests. Thirteen stakeholders representing patient advocates, payers, test developers, regulators, policy makers, and community-based oncologists ranked the tests before and after receiving VOI results. The stakeholders were surveyed about the usefulness and impact of the VOI findings.
resultsThe estimated upper-bound VOI ranged from $33 million to $2.8 billion for the 3 research areas. Seven stakeholders indicated the results modified their rankings, 9 stated VOI data were useful, and all indicated they would support its use in future prioritization processes. Some stakeholders indicated expected value of sampled information might be the preferred choice when evaluating specific STUDY
designLimitations. Our study was limited by the size and the potential for selection bias in the composition of the external stakeholder group, lack of a randomized design to assess effect of VOI data on rankings, and the use of expected value of perfect information v. expected value of sample information methods.
conclusionsValue of information analyses may have a meaningful role in research topic prioritization for comparative effectiveness research in the United States, particularly when large differences in VOI across topic areas are identified. Additional research is needed to facilitate the use of more complex value of information analyses in this setting.
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.