ReviewPharmacoEconomics2019
Can You Repeat That? Exploring the Definition of a Successful Model Replication in Health Economics.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2019. 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.
- Reproducibility of published model-based cancer drug cost-effectiveness analyses: a study protocol for a cross-sectional analysis.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Comprehensive Review of Methods to Assess Uncertainty in Health Economic Evaluations.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Review
- Remarkably reproducible psychological (memory) phenomena in the classroom: some evidence for generality from small-N research.BMC psychology · 2022Article
- Does the Structure Matter? An External Validation and Health Economic Results Comparison of Event Simulation Approaches in Severe Obesity.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Article
- Replication of Published Health Economic Obesity Models: Assessment of Facilitators, Hurdles and Reproduction Success.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Article
- Characterizing the Validity and Real-World Utility of Health Technology Assessments in Healthcare: Future Directions Comment on "Problems and Promises of Health Technologies: The Role of Early Health Economic Modelling".International journal of health policy and management · 2020Article
- Improving Transparency in Decision Models: Current Issues and Potential Solutions.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) modelling taskforce suggests decision models should be thoroughly reported and transparent. However, the level of transparency and indeed how transparency should be assessed are yet to be defined. One way may be to attempt to replicate the model and its outputs. The ability to replicate a decision model could demonstrate adequate reporting transparency. This review aims to explore published definitions of replication success across all scientific disciplines and to consider how such a definition should be tailored for use in health economic models. A literature review was conducted to identify published definitions of a 'successful replication'. Using these as a foundation, several definitions of replication success were constructed, to be applicable to replications of economic decision models, with the associated strengths and weaknesses of such definitions discussed. A substantial body of literature discussing replicability was found; however, relatively few studies, ten, explicitly defined a successful replication. These definitions varied from subjective assessments to expecting exactly the same results to be reproduced. Whilst the definitions that have been found may help to construct a definition specific to health economics, no definition was found that completely encompassed the unique requirements for decision models. Replication is widely discussed in other scientific disciplines; however, as of yet, there is no consensus on how replicable models should be within health economics or what constitutes a successful replication. Replication studies can demonstrate how transparently a model is reported, identify potential calculation errors and inform future reporting practices. It may therefore be a useful adjunct to other transparency or quality measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31531833What 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.