Cited by 43Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeEconomic and Environmental ValuationPharmaceutical Economics and Policy

The impact of ignoring population heterogeneity when Markov models are used in cost-effectiveness analysis

Zaric, Gregory S.·2003·Medical Decision Making

Abstract

Many factors related to the spread and progression of diseases vary throughout a population. This heterogeneity is frequently ignored in cost-effectiveness analyses by using average or representative values or by considering multiple risk groups. The author explores the impact that such simplifying assumptions may have on the results and interpretation of cost-effectiveness analyses when Markov models are used to calculate the costs and health impact of interventions. A discrete-time Markov model for a disease is defined, and 5 potential interventions are considered. Health benefits, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are calculated for each intervention. It is assumed that the population is heterogeneous with respect to the probability of becoming sick. Ignoring this heterogeneity may lead to optimistic or pessimistic estimates of cost-effectiveness ratios, depending on the intervention and, in some cases, the parameter values. Implications are discussed of this finding on the use of league tables and on comparisons of cost-effectiveness ratios versus commonly accepted threshold values.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0272989x03256883

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Variables that affect transition probabilities but are not known at decision time, such as genetic mutation and undiagnosed infection, can create heterogeneity bias, and inclusion of such variables should be considered.

    “Variables that affect transition probabilities but are not known at decision time (e.g., genetic mutation and undiagnosed infection) can create "heterogeneity bias" [45,46], and inclusion of such variables should be considered.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zaric, G. S.
Affiliations
Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
Zaric, Gregory S.
Venue
Medical Decision Making
Published
2003-09
Volume
23
Issue
5
Pages
379-386
ISSN
  • 0272-989X (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-681X
OpenAlex
W2129285512
Cited by
43
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Medical Decision Making (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Keywords
population heterogeneity, Markov model, cost-effectiveness analysis, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, disease progression, risk groups, health interventions, league tables, cost-effectiveness threshold
MeSH terms
Cost-Benefit Analysis, Health Status, Humans, Markov Chains, Population, Life Tables, Models, Econometric

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review