Loading…

Accounting for Heterogeneity in Relative Treatment Effects for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Models and Value-of-Information Analyses

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) models are routinely used to inform health care policy. Key model inputs include relative effectiveness of competing treatments, typically informed by meta-analysis. Heterogeneity is ubiquitous in meta-analysis, and random effects models are usually used when there...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Medical decision making 2015-07, Vol.35 (5), p.608-621
Main Authors: Welton, Nicky J., Soares, Marta O., Palmer, Stephen, Ades, Anthony E., Harrison, David, Shankar-Hari, Manu, Rowan, Kathy M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c504t-261d62c19278bfeb1e0b899f14ceb93f4cfe7f2357b561118ce6b78b1fb45ceb3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c504t-261d62c19278bfeb1e0b899f14ceb93f4cfe7f2357b561118ce6b78b1fb45ceb3
container_end_page 621
container_issue 5
container_start_page 608
container_title Medical decision making
container_volume 35
creator Welton, Nicky J.
Soares, Marta O.
Palmer, Stephen
Ades, Anthony E.
Harrison, David
Shankar-Hari, Manu
Rowan, Kathy M.
description Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) models are routinely used to inform health care policy. Key model inputs include relative effectiveness of competing treatments, typically informed by meta-analysis. Heterogeneity is ubiquitous in meta-analysis, and random effects models are usually used when there is variability in effects across studies. In the absence of observed treatment effect modifiers, various summaries from the random effects distribution (random effects mean, predictive distribution, random effects distribution, or study-specific estimate [shrunken or independent of other studies]) can be used depending on the relationship between the setting for the decision (population characteristics, treatment definitions, and other contextual factors) and the included studies. If covariates have been measured that could potentially explain the heterogeneity, then these can be included in a meta-regression model. We describe how covariates can be included in a network meta-analysis model and how the output from such an analysis can be used in a CEA model. We outline a model selection procedure to help choose between competing models and stress the importance of clinical input. We illustrate the approach with a health technology assessment of intravenous immunoglobulin for the management of adult patients with severe sepsis in an intensive care setting, which exemplifies how risk of bias information can be incorporated into CEA models. We show that the results of the CEA and value-of-information analyses are sensitive to the model and highlight the importance of sensitivity analyses when conducting CEA in the presence of heterogeneity. The methods presented extend naturally to heterogeneity in other model inputs, such as baseline risk.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/0272989X15570113
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4471065</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0272989X15570113</sage_id><sourcerecordid>1689842218</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c504t-261d62c19278bfeb1e0b899f14ceb93f4cfe7f2357b561118ce6b78b1fb45ceb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kcFrFDEUxoModq3ePUmOXmLzsjOTmYuwLK0tVARppbeQyb6sU2aSmpcp7NH_3KzbFhU8JeT7fV-S7zH2FuQHAK1PpNKqa7sbqGstAZbP2KJslWhauHnOFntZ7PUj9oroVkqourZ6yY5UrUFVlV6wnyvn4hzyELbcx8TPMWOKWww45B0fAv-Ko83DPfKrhDZPGDI_9R5dpt_8NeGeWkfK4nBe2IBE_HPc4Ejchg3_ZscZRfTiIhTPVPJi4Ktgxx0hvWYvvB0J3zysx-z67PRqfS4uv3y6WK8uhatllYVqYNMoB53Sbe-xB5R923UeKod9t_SV86i9Wta6rxsAaB02fUHB91VdkOUx-3jIvZv7CTeu_CTZ0dylYbJpZ6IdzN9KGL6bbbw3pSeQTV0C3j8EpPhjRspmGsjhONqAcSYDTVvaVQragsoD6lIkSuifrgFp9pMz_06uWN79-bwnw-OoCiAOANktmts4p1Ig_T_wF-expLc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1689842218</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Accounting for Heterogeneity in Relative Treatment Effects for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Models and Value-of-Information Analyses</title><source>SAGE</source><creator>Welton, Nicky J. ; Soares, Marta O. ; Palmer, Stephen ; Ades, Anthony E. ; Harrison, David ; Shankar-Hari, Manu ; Rowan, Kathy M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Welton, Nicky J. ; Soares, Marta O. ; Palmer, Stephen ; Ades, Anthony E. ; Harrison, David ; Shankar-Hari, Manu ; Rowan, Kathy M.</creatorcontrib><description>Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) models are routinely used to inform health care policy. Key model inputs include relative effectiveness of competing treatments, typically informed by meta-analysis. Heterogeneity is ubiquitous in meta-analysis, and random effects models are usually used when there is variability in effects across studies. In the absence of observed treatment effect modifiers, various summaries from the random effects distribution (random effects mean, predictive distribution, random effects distribution, or study-specific estimate [shrunken or independent of other studies]) can be used depending on the relationship between the setting for the decision (population characteristics, treatment definitions, and other contextual factors) and the included studies. If covariates have been measured that could potentially explain the heterogeneity, then these can be included in a meta-regression model. We describe how covariates can be included in a network meta-analysis model and how the output from such an analysis can be used in a CEA model. We outline a model selection procedure to help choose between competing models and stress the importance of clinical input. We illustrate the approach with a health technology assessment of intravenous immunoglobulin for the management of adult patients with severe sepsis in an intensive care setting, which exemplifies how risk of bias information can be incorporated into CEA models. We show that the results of the CEA and value-of-information analyses are sensitive to the model and highlight the importance of sensitivity analyses when conducting CEA in the presence of heterogeneity. The methods presented extend naturally to heterogeneity in other model inputs, such as baseline risk.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0272-989X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1552-681X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-681X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0272989X15570113</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25712447</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Bayes Theorem ; Bias ; Cost-Benefit Analysis - methods ; Decision Support Techniques ; Humans ; Meta-Analysis as Topic ; Original ; Regression Analysis ; Sepsis - drug therapy</subject><ispartof>Medical decision making, 2015-07, Vol.35 (5), p.608-621</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2015</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2015.</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2015 2015 Society for Medical Decision Making</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c504t-261d62c19278bfeb1e0b899f14ceb93f4cfe7f2357b561118ce6b78b1fb45ceb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c504t-261d62c19278bfeb1e0b899f14ceb93f4cfe7f2357b561118ce6b78b1fb45ceb3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925,79364</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25712447$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Welton, Nicky J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soares, Marta O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palmer, Stephen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ades, Anthony E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harrison, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shankar-Hari, Manu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rowan, Kathy M.</creatorcontrib><title>Accounting for Heterogeneity in Relative Treatment Effects for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Models and Value-of-Information Analyses</title><title>Medical decision making</title><addtitle>Med Decis Making</addtitle><description>Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) models are routinely used to inform health care policy. Key model inputs include relative effectiveness of competing treatments, typically informed by meta-analysis. Heterogeneity is ubiquitous in meta-analysis, and random effects models are usually used when there is variability in effects across studies. In the absence of observed treatment effect modifiers, various summaries from the random effects distribution (random effects mean, predictive distribution, random effects distribution, or study-specific estimate [shrunken or independent of other studies]) can be used depending on the relationship between the setting for the decision (population characteristics, treatment definitions, and other contextual factors) and the included studies. If covariates have been measured that could potentially explain the heterogeneity, then these can be included in a meta-regression model. We describe how covariates can be included in a network meta-analysis model and how the output from such an analysis can be used in a CEA model. We outline a model selection procedure to help choose between competing models and stress the importance of clinical input. We illustrate the approach with a health technology assessment of intravenous immunoglobulin for the management of adult patients with severe sepsis in an intensive care setting, which exemplifies how risk of bias information can be incorporated into CEA models. We show that the results of the CEA and value-of-information analyses are sensitive to the model and highlight the importance of sensitivity analyses when conducting CEA in the presence of heterogeneity. The methods presented extend naturally to heterogeneity in other model inputs, such as baseline risk.</description><subject>Bayes Theorem</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis - methods</subject><subject>Decision Support Techniques</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Meta-Analysis as Topic</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Regression Analysis</subject><subject>Sepsis - drug therapy</subject><issn>0272-989X</issn><issn>1552-681X</issn><issn>1552-681X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFRWT</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kcFrFDEUxoModq3ePUmOXmLzsjOTmYuwLK0tVARppbeQyb6sU2aSmpcp7NH_3KzbFhU8JeT7fV-S7zH2FuQHAK1PpNKqa7sbqGstAZbP2KJslWhauHnOFntZ7PUj9oroVkqourZ6yY5UrUFVlV6wnyvn4hzyELbcx8TPMWOKWww45B0fAv-Ko83DPfKrhDZPGDI_9R5dpt_8NeGeWkfK4nBe2IBE_HPc4Ejchg3_ZscZRfTiIhTPVPJi4Ktgxx0hvWYvvB0J3zysx-z67PRqfS4uv3y6WK8uhatllYVqYNMoB53Sbe-xB5R923UeKod9t_SV86i9Wta6rxsAaB02fUHB91VdkOUx-3jIvZv7CTeu_CTZ0dylYbJpZ6IdzN9KGL6bbbw3pSeQTV0C3j8EpPhjRspmGsjhONqAcSYDTVvaVQragsoD6lIkSuifrgFp9pMz_06uWN79-bwnw-OoCiAOANktmts4p1Ig_T_wF-expLc</recordid><startdate>20150701</startdate><enddate>20150701</enddate><creator>Welton, Nicky J.</creator><creator>Soares, Marta O.</creator><creator>Palmer, Stephen</creator><creator>Ades, Anthony E.</creator><creator>Harrison, David</creator><creator>Shankar-Hari, Manu</creator><creator>Rowan, Kathy M.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>AFRWT</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150701</creationdate><title>Accounting for Heterogeneity in Relative Treatment Effects for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Models and Value-of-Information Analyses</title><author>Welton, Nicky J. ; Soares, Marta O. ; Palmer, Stephen ; Ades, Anthony E. ; Harrison, David ; Shankar-Hari, Manu ; Rowan, Kathy M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c504t-261d62c19278bfeb1e0b899f14ceb93f4cfe7f2357b561118ce6b78b1fb45ceb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Bayes Theorem</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Cost-Benefit Analysis - methods</topic><topic>Decision Support Techniques</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Meta-Analysis as Topic</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Regression Analysis</topic><topic>Sepsis - drug therapy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Welton, Nicky J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soares, Marta O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palmer, Stephen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ades, Anthony E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harrison, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shankar-Hari, Manu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rowan, Kathy M.</creatorcontrib><collection>SAGE Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Medical decision making</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Welton, Nicky J.</au><au>Soares, Marta O.</au><au>Palmer, Stephen</au><au>Ades, Anthony E.</au><au>Harrison, David</au><au>Shankar-Hari, Manu</au><au>Rowan, Kathy M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Accounting for Heterogeneity in Relative Treatment Effects for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Models and Value-of-Information Analyses</atitle><jtitle>Medical decision making</jtitle><addtitle>Med Decis Making</addtitle><date>2015-07-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>608</spage><epage>621</epage><pages>608-621</pages><issn>0272-989X</issn><issn>1552-681X</issn><eissn>1552-681X</eissn><abstract>Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) models are routinely used to inform health care policy. Key model inputs include relative effectiveness of competing treatments, typically informed by meta-analysis. Heterogeneity is ubiquitous in meta-analysis, and random effects models are usually used when there is variability in effects across studies. In the absence of observed treatment effect modifiers, various summaries from the random effects distribution (random effects mean, predictive distribution, random effects distribution, or study-specific estimate [shrunken or independent of other studies]) can be used depending on the relationship between the setting for the decision (population characteristics, treatment definitions, and other contextual factors) and the included studies. If covariates have been measured that could potentially explain the heterogeneity, then these can be included in a meta-regression model. We describe how covariates can be included in a network meta-analysis model and how the output from such an analysis can be used in a CEA model. We outline a model selection procedure to help choose between competing models and stress the importance of clinical input. We illustrate the approach with a health technology assessment of intravenous immunoglobulin for the management of adult patients with severe sepsis in an intensive care setting, which exemplifies how risk of bias information can be incorporated into CEA models. We show that the results of the CEA and value-of-information analyses are sensitive to the model and highlight the importance of sensitivity analyses when conducting CEA in the presence of heterogeneity. The methods presented extend naturally to heterogeneity in other model inputs, such as baseline risk.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>25712447</pmid><doi>10.1177/0272989X15570113</doi><tpages>14</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0272-989X
ispartof Medical decision making, 2015-07, Vol.35 (5), p.608-621
issn 0272-989X
1552-681X
1552-681X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4471065
source SAGE
subjects Bayes Theorem
Bias
Cost-Benefit Analysis - methods
Decision Support Techniques
Humans
Meta-Analysis as Topic
Original
Regression Analysis
Sepsis - drug therapy
title Accounting for Heterogeneity in Relative Treatment Effects for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Models and Value-of-Information Analyses
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T14%3A55%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Accounting%20for%20Heterogeneity%20in%20Relative%20Treatment%20Effects%20for%20Use%20in%20Cost-Effectiveness%20Models%20and%20Value-of-Information%20Analyses&rft.jtitle=Medical%20decision%20making&rft.au=Welton,%20Nicky%20J.&rft.date=2015-07-01&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=608&rft.epage=621&rft.pages=608-621&rft.issn=0272-989X&rft.eissn=1552-681X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0272989X15570113&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1689842218%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c504t-261d62c19278bfeb1e0b899f14ceb93f4cfe7f2357b561118ce6b78b1fb45ceb3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1689842218&rft_id=info:pmid/25712447&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0272989X15570113&rfr_iscdi=true