ArticlePharmacoEconomics2016
Myths and Misconceptions of Within-Cycle Correction: A Guide for Modelers and Decision Makers.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness of multimodal intervention for the prevention of dementia in Japan.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Distributional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Using Microsimulation in R: A Tutorial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Article
- The Cost Utility of Rhythm Control Treatment Sequences in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Anti-arrhythmic Drugs Versus Catheter Ablation.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of total knee arthroplasty, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, and high tibial osteotomy for medial compartment knee osteoarthritis in young patients: a Canadian public payer perspective.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- A Fast Nonparametric Sampling Method for Time to Event in Individual-Level Simulation Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025Article
- A Fast Nonparametric Sampling (NPS) Method for Time-to-Event in Individual-Level Simulation Models.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- An Introductory Tutorial on Cohort State-Transition Models in R Using a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Example.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2023Article
- A Tutorial on Time-Dependent Cohort State-Transition Models in R Using a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Example.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2023Article
- Low cumulative disease activity is associated with higher bone mineral density in a majority Latinx and Asian US rheumatoid arthritis cohort.Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism · 2022Article
- Economic evaluation of population-based type 2 diabetes mellitus screening at different healthcare settings in Vietnam.PloS one · 2021Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Lenvatinib Compared with Sorafenib for the First-Line Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Australia.Clinical drug investigation · 2020Article
- Cost-Utility Analysis of Direct-Acting Antivirals for Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C Genotype 1 and 6 in Vietnam.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2020Article
- Individualized Glycemic Control for U.S. Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Annals of internal medicine · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Commonly used decision-analytic models for cost-effectiveness analysis simulate time in discrete steps. Use of discrete-time steps can introduce errors when calculating cumulative outcomes such as costs and quality-adjusted life-years. There are a number of myths or misconceptions concerning how to correct these errors and the need to do so. This tutorial shows that, by neglecting to apply within-cycle (sometimes referred to as half-cycle or continuity) correction methods to the results of discrete-time models, the analyst may arrive at the wrong recommendation regarding the use of a technology. We show that the standard half-cycle correction method results in the same cumulative outcome as the trapezoidal rule and life-table method. However, the trapezoidal rule has the added advantage of applying the correction at each cycle, not just the initial and final cycle. We further show that the Simpson's 1/3 rule is more accurate than the trapezoidal rule. We recommend using the Simpson's 1/3 rule in the base-case analysis and, if needed, showing the results with other methods in the sensitivity analysis. We also demonstrate that both the trapezoidal and Simpson's rules can easily be implemented in commonly used software.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26643402What 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.