Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32113617›Full record

ReviewValue in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research2020

Value of Information Analysis for Research Decisions-An Introduction: Report 1 of the ISPOR Value of Information Analysis Emerging Good Practices Task Force.

Elisabeth Fenwick, Lotte Steuten, Saskia Knies, Salah Ghabri, Anirban Basu, James F Murray, Hendrik Erik Koffijberg, Mark Strong, Gillian D Sanders Schmidler, Claire Rothery

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 100 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
100citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

100 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Methods for Communicating the Impact of Parameter Uncertainty in a Multiple-Strategies Cost-Effectiveness Comparison.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. A Pragmatic Bayesian Adaptive Trial Design Based on the Value of Information: The Value-Driven Adaptive Design.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Value-Based Pricing of Health Services With Health Equity Considerations.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

40 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Elisabeth FenwickPharmerit International, Oxford, England, UK. Electronic address: efenwick@pharmerit.com.
Lotte SteutenOffice of Health Economics, London, England, UK.
Saskia KniesNational Health Care Institute (Zorginstituut Nederland), Diemen, The Netherlands.
Salah GhabriFrench National Authority for Health, Paris, France.
Anirban BasuThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
James F MurrayGlobal Patient Outcomes and Real World Evidence, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Hendrik Erik KoffijbergDepartment of Health Technology & Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Mark StrongSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England, UK.
Gillian D Sanders SchmidlerDuke-Margolis Center for Health Policy, Duke Clinical Research Institute and Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Claire RotheryCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, England, UK.

Funding

Value of Information Methods for NHLBI TrialsR01HL126804 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BASU, ANIRBAN · 2015 to 2018
$2.7M
Department of Health PDF-2012-05-258Medical Research Council G0601721Medical Research Council MR/J000434/1NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL126804
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Healthcare resource allocation decisions made under conditions of uncertainty may turn out to be suboptimal. In a resource constrained system in which there is a fixed budget, these suboptimal decisions will result in health loss. Consequently, there may be value in reducing uncertainty, through the collection of new evidence, to make better resource allocation decisions. This value can be quantified using a value of information (VOI) analysis. This report, from the ISPOR VOI Task Force, introduces VOI analysis, defines key concepts and terminology, and outlines the role of VOI for supporting decision making, including the steps involved in undertaking and interpreting VOI analyses. The report is specifically aimed at those tasked with making decisions about the adoption of healthcare or the funding of healthcare research. The report provides a number of recommendations for good practice when planning, undertaking, or reviewing the results of VOI analyses.

Indexed as

BudgetsDecision MakingDecision Support TechniquesDrug CostsCost-Benefit AnalysisCost SavingsDrug DevelopmentHealth Care RationingHealth Services ResearchHumansInsurance, Health, ReimbursementModels, EconomicModels, StatisticalPolicy MakingTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalValue-Based Health Insurancedecision makingexpected net benefit of samplingexpected value of informationexpected value of perfect informationvalue of informationvalue of research

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.