ReviewPharmacoEconomics2023
Comprehensive Review of Methods to Assess Uncertainty in Health Economic Evaluations.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Economic evaluations of neoadjuvant drug regimens in cancer: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Methods and evidence in economic evaluations of modern radiotherapy: a systematic mapping review protocol.BMJ open · 2026Article
- A multi-stakeholder survey on communicating cost-effectiveness uncertainties to stakeholders: a case study of ICER.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Economic evaluation of school scoliosis screening in Gannan Tibetan autonomous prefecture, Gansu Province: a cost-utility analysis based on decision tree-Markov model.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- HLA-B27 detection test for individuals with suspected axial spondyloarthritis to Brazilian public health system: accuracy, cost-effectiveness, and budget impact analysis.GMS health innovation and technologies · 2026Article
- A Reconciled Method for Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Implementation Programmes: Illustrated by Quality Improvement Programmes to Increase the Uptake of Magnesium Sulphate in Preterm Births.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of sacituzumab tirumotecan vs. chemotherapy for patients with EGFR-TKI-resistant, EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Role and Policy Implications of Using External Evidence in Survival Extrapolations: A Case Study of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel Therapy for Second-Line DLBCL.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Article
- Bring Out Your Dead: A Review of the Cost Minimisation Approach in Health Technology Assessment Submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of trifluridine/tipiracil combined with bevacizumab vs. monotherapy for third-line treatment of colorectal cancer.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Response to uncertainty management in regulatory and health technology assessment decision-making on drugs: guidance of the HTAi-DIA Working Group - author's reply.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2023Article
- Response to "UNCERTAINTY MANAGEMENT IN REGULATORY AND HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT DECISION-MAKING ON DRUGS: GUIDANCE OF THE HTAi-DIA WORKING GROUP".International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Uncertainty assessment is a cornerstone in model-based health economic evaluations (HEEs) that inform reimbursement decisions. No comprehensive overview of available uncertainty assessment methods currently exists. We aimed to review methods for uncertainty assessment for use in model-based HEEs, by conducting a snowballing review. We categorised all methods according to their stage of use relating to uncertainty assessment (identification, analysis, communication). Additionally, we classified identification methods according to sources of uncertainty, and subdivided analysis and communication methods according to their purpose. The review identified a total of 80 uncertainty methods: 30 identification, 28 analysis, and 22 communication methods. Uncertainty identification methods exist to address uncertainty from different sources. Most identification methods were developed with the objective to assess related concepts such as validity, model quality, and relevance. Almost all uncertainty analysis and communication methods required uncertainty to be quantified and inclusion of uncertainties in probabilistic analysis. Our review can help analysts and decision makers in selecting uncertainty assessment methods according to their aim and purpose of the assessment. We noted a need for further clarification of terminology and guidance on the use of (combinations of) methods to identify uncertainty and related concepts such as validity and quality. A key finding is that uncertainty assessment relies heavily on quantification, which may necessitate increased use of expert elicitation and/or the development of methods to assess unquantified uncertainty.
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.