ReviewPharmacoEconomics2017
Verification of Decision-Analytic Models for Health Economic Evaluations: An Overview.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Use of V116, a 21-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine, in Vaccine-Naïve Adults Aged ≥ 65 Years in the United States.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2024Article
- Electronic Decision-Making Tool for Smoking Cessation (Pare de Fumar Conosco) Versus Standard of Care: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Value in health regional issues · 2024Article
- Lifetime Health and Economic Burden of Invasive Pneumococcal Diseases Attributable to V116 Serotypes Among Adults in the United States.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2024Article
- Estimates of the Health and Economic Burden of Pneumococcal Infections Attributable to the 15-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine Serotypes in the USA.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2022Article
- Four Aspects Affecting Health Economic Decision Models and Their Validation.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Article
- Assessing the Health and Economic Outcomes of a 9-Valent HPV Vaccination Program in the United Kingdom.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2022Article
- TECH-VER: A Verification Checklist to Reduce Errors in Models and Improve Their Credibility.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Article
- Trusting the Results of Model-Based Economic Analyses: Is there a Pragmatic Validation Solution?PharmacoEconomics · 2019Article
- Budget impact analysis of the adoption of new hypertension guidelines in Colombia.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2018Article
- Ahead of Our Time: Collaboration in Modeling Then and Now.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Article
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
Decision-analytic models for cost-effectiveness analysis are developed in a variety of software packages where the accuracy of the computer code is seldom verified. Although modeling guidelines recommend using state-of-the-art quality assurance and control methods for software engineering to verify models, the fields of pharmacoeconomics and health technology assessment (HTA) have yet to establish and adopt guidance on how to verify health and economic models. The objective of this paper is to introduce to our field the variety of methods the software engineering field uses to verify that software performs as expected. We identify how many of these methods can be incorporated in the development process of decision-analytic models in order to reduce errors and increase transparency. Given the breadth of methods used in software engineering, we recommend a more in-depth initiative to be undertaken (e.g., by an ISPOR-SMDM Task Force) to define the best practices for model verification in our field and to accelerate adoption. Establishing a general guidance for verifying models will benefit the pharmacoeconomics and HTA communities by increasing accuracy of computer programming, transparency, accessibility, sharing, understandability, and trust of models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28456972What 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.