ArticlePloS one2018
Comparison of the flexible parametric survival model and Cox model in estimating Markov transition probabilities using real-world data.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance evaluation of survival regression models in analysing Swedish dental implant complication data with frailty.PloS one · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Using Multistate Models and Qualitative Interviews to Comprehensively Characterize Substance Use Disorder Care Transitions in a US Health Care System: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Comparing parametric and Cox regression models using HIV/AIDS survival data from a retrospective study in Ntcheu district in Malawi.Journal of public health research · 2022Article
- After 20 Years of Using Economic Evaluation, Should NICE be Considered a Methods Innovator?PharmacoEconomics · 2020Article
- Long term outcomes for elderly patients after emergency intensive care admission: A cohort study.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveMarkov micro-simulation models are being increasingly used in health economic evaluations. An important feature of the Markov micro-simulation model is its ability to consider transition probabilities of heterogeneous subgroups with different risk profiles. A survival analysis is generally performed to accurately estimate the transition probabilities associated with the risk profiles. This study aimed to apply a flexible parametric survival model (FPSM) to estimate individual transition probabilities. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe data were obtained from a cohort study investigating ischemic stroke outcomes in Western China. In total, 585 subjects were included in the analysis. To explore the goodness of fit of the FPSM, we compared the estimated hazard ratios and baseline cumulative hazards, both of which are necessary to the calculate individual transition probabilities, and the Markov micro-simulation models constructed using the FPSM and Cox model to determine the validity of the two Markov micro-simulation models and cost-effectiveness results.
resultsThe flexible parametric proportional hazards model produced hazard ratio and baseline cumulative hazard estimates that were similar to those obtained using the Cox proportional hazards model. The simulated cumulative incidence of recurrent ischemic stroke and 5-years cost-effectiveness of Incremental cost-effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were also similar using the two approaches. A discrepancy in the results was evident between the 5-years cost-effectiveness and the 10-years cost-effectiveness of ICERs, which were approximately 0.9 million (China Yuan) and 0.5 million (China Yuan), respectively.
conclusionsThe flexible parametric survival model represents a good approach for estimating individual transition probabilities for a Markov micro-simulation model.
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.