Simulation modeling of outcomes and cost effectiveness

Scott D. Ramsey, Martin McIntosh, Ruth Etzioni, Nicole Urban

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

28 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Modeling will continue to be used to address important issues in clinical practice and health policy issues that have not been adequately studied with high-quality clinical trials. The apparent ad hoc nature of models belies the methodologic rigor that is applied to create the best models in cancer prevention and care. Models have progressed from simple decision trees to extremely complex microsimulation analyses, yet all are built using a logical process based on objective evaluation of the path between intervention and outcome. The best modelers take great care to justify both the structure and content of the model and then test their assumptions using a comprehensive process of sensitivity analysis and model validation. Like clinical trials, models sometimes produce results that are later found to be invalid as other data become available. When weighing the value of models in health care decision making, it is reasonable to consider the alternatives. In the absence of data, clinical policy decisions are often based on the recommendations of expert opinion panels or on poorly defined notions of the standard of care or medical necessity. Because such decision making rarely entails the rigorous process of data collection, synthesis, and testing that is the core of well-conducted modeling, it is usually not possible for external audiences to examine the assumptions and data that were used to derive the decisions. One of the modeler's most challenging tasks is to make the structure and content of the model transparent to the intended audience. The purpose of this article is to clarify the process of modeling, so that readers of models are more knowledgeable about their uses, strengths, and limitations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)925-938
Number of pages14
JournalHematology/Oncology Clinics of North America
Volume14
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Cost-Benefit Analysis
Decision Making
Clinical Trials
Decision Trees
Expert Testimony
Standard of Care
Health Policy
Delivery of Health Care
Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Hematology
  • Oncology

Cite this

Simulation modeling of outcomes and cost effectiveness. / Ramsey, Scott D.; McIntosh, Martin; Etzioni, Ruth; Urban, Nicole.

In: Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America, Vol. 14, No. 4, 01.01.2000, p. 925-938.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ramsey, Scott D. ; McIntosh, Martin ; Etzioni, Ruth ; Urban, Nicole. / Simulation modeling of outcomes and cost effectiveness. In: Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America. 2000 ; Vol. 14, No. 4. pp. 925-938.
@article{64f653c5649c444eb2cddfb521ba72d2,
title = "Simulation modeling of outcomes and cost effectiveness",
abstract = "Modeling will continue to be used to address important issues in clinical practice and health policy issues that have not been adequately studied with high-quality clinical trials. The apparent ad hoc nature of models belies the methodologic rigor that is applied to create the best models in cancer prevention and care. Models have progressed from simple decision trees to extremely complex microsimulation analyses, yet all are built using a logical process based on objective evaluation of the path between intervention and outcome. The best modelers take great care to justify both the structure and content of the model and then test their assumptions using a comprehensive process of sensitivity analysis and model validation. Like clinical trials, models sometimes produce results that are later found to be invalid as other data become available. When weighing the value of models in health care decision making, it is reasonable to consider the alternatives. In the absence of data, clinical policy decisions are often based on the recommendations of expert opinion panels or on poorly defined notions of the standard of care or medical necessity. Because such decision making rarely entails the rigorous process of data collection, synthesis, and testing that is the core of well-conducted modeling, it is usually not possible for external audiences to examine the assumptions and data that were used to derive the decisions. One of the modeler's most challenging tasks is to make the structure and content of the model transparent to the intended audience. The purpose of this article is to clarify the process of modeling, so that readers of models are more knowledgeable about their uses, strengths, and limitations.",
author = "Ramsey, {Scott D.} and Martin McIntosh and Ruth Etzioni and Nicole Urban",
year = "2000",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0889-8588(05)70319-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "925--938",
journal = "Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America",
issn = "0889-8588",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Simulation modeling of outcomes and cost effectiveness

AU - Ramsey, Scott D.

AU - McIntosh, Martin

AU - Etzioni, Ruth

AU - Urban, Nicole

PY - 2000/1/1

Y1 - 2000/1/1

N2 - Modeling will continue to be used to address important issues in clinical practice and health policy issues that have not been adequately studied with high-quality clinical trials. The apparent ad hoc nature of models belies the methodologic rigor that is applied to create the best models in cancer prevention and care. Models have progressed from simple decision trees to extremely complex microsimulation analyses, yet all are built using a logical process based on objective evaluation of the path between intervention and outcome. The best modelers take great care to justify both the structure and content of the model and then test their assumptions using a comprehensive process of sensitivity analysis and model validation. Like clinical trials, models sometimes produce results that are later found to be invalid as other data become available. When weighing the value of models in health care decision making, it is reasonable to consider the alternatives. In the absence of data, clinical policy decisions are often based on the recommendations of expert opinion panels or on poorly defined notions of the standard of care or medical necessity. Because such decision making rarely entails the rigorous process of data collection, synthesis, and testing that is the core of well-conducted modeling, it is usually not possible for external audiences to examine the assumptions and data that were used to derive the decisions. One of the modeler's most challenging tasks is to make the structure and content of the model transparent to the intended audience. The purpose of this article is to clarify the process of modeling, so that readers of models are more knowledgeable about their uses, strengths, and limitations.

AB - Modeling will continue to be used to address important issues in clinical practice and health policy issues that have not been adequately studied with high-quality clinical trials. The apparent ad hoc nature of models belies the methodologic rigor that is applied to create the best models in cancer prevention and care. Models have progressed from simple decision trees to extremely complex microsimulation analyses, yet all are built using a logical process based on objective evaluation of the path between intervention and outcome. The best modelers take great care to justify both the structure and content of the model and then test their assumptions using a comprehensive process of sensitivity analysis and model validation. Like clinical trials, models sometimes produce results that are later found to be invalid as other data become available. When weighing the value of models in health care decision making, it is reasonable to consider the alternatives. In the absence of data, clinical policy decisions are often based on the recommendations of expert opinion panels or on poorly defined notions of the standard of care or medical necessity. Because such decision making rarely entails the rigorous process of data collection, synthesis, and testing that is the core of well-conducted modeling, it is usually not possible for external audiences to examine the assumptions and data that were used to derive the decisions. One of the modeler's most challenging tasks is to make the structure and content of the model transparent to the intended audience. The purpose of this article is to clarify the process of modeling, so that readers of models are more knowledgeable about their uses, strengths, and limitations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033887389&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033887389&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0889-8588(05)70319-1

DO - 10.1016/S0889-8588(05)70319-1

M3 - Article

C2 - 10949781

AN - SCOPUS:0033887389

VL - 14

SP - 925

EP - 938

JO - Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America

JF - Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America

SN - 0889-8588

IS - 4

ER -