Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25810269›Full record

ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2015

Estimating the Expected Value of Sample Information Using the Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis Sample: A Fast, Nonparametric Regression-Based Method.

Mark Strong, Jeremy E Oakley, Alan Brennan, Penny Breeze

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. General-Purpose Methods for Simulating Survival Data for Expected Value of Sample Information Calculations.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2023
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. A Pragmatic Bayesian Adaptive Trial Design Based on the Value of Information: The Value-Driven Adaptive Design.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Global sensitivity analysis of integrated assessment models with multivariate outputs.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A Nonparametric Approach for Estimating the Effective Sample Size in Gaussian Approximation of Expected Value of Sample Information.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025
    Article
  16. Accurate EVSI Estimation for Nonlinear Models Using the Gaussian Approximation Method.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024
    Article
  17. 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
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Mark StrongSchool of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK (MS, AB, PB)
Jeremy E OakleySchool of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK (JEO).
Alan BrennanSchool of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK (MS, AB, PB)
Penny BreezeSchool of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK (MS, AB, PB)

Funding

Department of Health PDF-2012-05-258Medical Research Council G0601721
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Health economic decision-analytic models are used to estimate the expected net benefits of competing decision options. The true values of the input parameters of such models are rarely known with certainty, and it is often useful to quantify the value to the decision maker of reducing uncertainty through collecting new data. In the context of a particular decision problem, the value of a proposed research design can be quantified by its expected value of sample information (EVSI). EVSI is commonly estimated via a 2-level Monte Carlo procedure in which plausible data sets are generated in an outer loop, and then, conditional on these, the parameters of the decision model are updated via Bayes rule and sampled in an inner loop. At each iteration of the inner loop, the decision model is evaluated. This is computationally demanding and may be difficult if the posterior distribution of the model parameters conditional on sampled data is hard to sample from. We describe a fast nonparametric regression-based method for estimating per-patient EVSI that requires only the probabilistic sensitivity analysis sample (i.e., the set of samples drawn from the joint distribution of the parameters and the corresponding net benefits). The method avoids the need to sample from the posterior distributions of the parameters and avoids the need to rerun the model. The only requirement is that sample data sets can be generated. The method is applicable with a model of any complexity and with any specification of model parameter distribution. We demonstrate in a case study the superior efficiency of the regression method over the 2-level Monte Carlo method.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesRegression AnalysisStatistics, NonparametricBayes TheoremDecision TreesHumansMonte Carlo MethodProbabilityBayesian decision theorycomputational methodseconomic evaluation modelexpected value of sample informationgeneralized additive model.Monte Carlo methodsnonparametric regression

Identifiers

PMID25810269
PMCPMC4471064

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.