ArticlePharmacoEconomics2017
Replicating Health Economic Models: Firm Foundations or a House of Cards?
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Can We Make Health Economic Decision Models as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler? Introducing SMART tool.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Replication of Published Health Economic Obesity Models: Assessment of Facilitators, Hurdles and Reproduction Success.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Article
- Learnings for Health Economics from the Early Stages of the COVID-19 Pandemic.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2020Article
- Modelling the Cost-Effectiveness of Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium versus Salmeterol/Fluticasone Using a Novel Markov Exacerbation-Based Approach.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2020Article
- Can You Repeat That? Exploring the Definition of a Successful Model Replication in Health Economics.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Review
- Response to 'Comment on "Replicating Health Economic Models: Firm Foundations or a House of Cards?"'.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Article
- Comment on "Replicating Health Economic Models: Firm Foundations or a House of Cards?"PharmacoEconomics · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health economic evaluation is a framework for the comparative analysis of the incremental health gains and costs associated with competing decision alternatives. The process of developing health economic models is usually complex, financially expensive and time-consuming. For these reasons, model development is sometimes based on previous model-based analyses; this endeavour is usually referred to as model replication. Such model replication activity may involve the comprehensive reproduction of an existing model or 'borrowing' all or part of a previously developed model structure. Generally speaking, the replication of an existing model may require substantially less effort than developing a new de novo model by bypassing, or undertaking in only a perfunctory manner, certain aspects of model development such as the development of a complete conceptual model and/or comprehensive literature searching for model parameters. A further motivation for model replication may be to draw on the credibility or prestige of previous analyses that have been published and/or used to inform decision making. The acceptability and appropriateness of replicating models depends on the decision-making context: there exists a trade-off between the 'savings' afforded by model replication and the potential 'costs' associated with reduced model credibility due to the omission of certain stages of model development. This paper provides an overview of the different levels of, and motivations for, replicating health economic models, and discusses the advantages, disadvantages and caveats associated with this type of modelling activity. Irrespective of whether replicated models should be considered appropriate or not, complete replicability is generally accepted as a desirable property of health economic models, as reflected in critical appraisal checklists and good practice guidelines. To this end, the feasibility of comprehensive model replication is explored empirically across a small number of recent case studies. Recommendations are put forward for improving reporting standards to enhance comprehensive model replicability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28748450What 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.