Estimation of Markov Chain Transition Probabilities and Rates from Fully and Partially Observed Data: Uncertainty Propagation, Evidence Synthesis, and Model Calibration
Abstract
Markov transition models are frequently used to model disease progression. The authors show how the solution to Kolmogorov’s forward equations can be exploited to map between transition rates and probabilities from probability data in multistate models. They provide a uniform, Bayesian treatment of estimation and propagation of uncertainty of transition rates and probabilities when 1) observations are available on all transitions and exact time at risk in each state (fully observed data) and 2) observations are on initial state and final state after a fixed interval of time but not on the sequence of transitions (partially observed data). The authors show how underlying transition rates can be recovered from partially observed data using Markov chain Monte Carlo methods in WinBUGS, and they suggest diagnostics to investigate inconsistencies between evidence from different starting states. An illustrative example for a 3-state model is given, which shows how the methods extend to more complex Markov models using the software WBDiff to compute solutions. Finally, the authors illustrate how to statistically combine data from multiple sources, including partially observed data at several follow-up times and also how to calibrate a Markov model to be consistent with data from one specific study.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In a real-world CEA, parameters are estimated from electronic health records, clinical trials, and observational studies, and when there is no individual-level data to inform them, through model calibration.
“However, in a real-world CEA, parameters are estimated from electronic health records,33 clinical trials, and observational studies, and when there is no individual-level data to inform them, through model calibration.34”
From A Tutorial on Time-Dependent Cohort State-Transition Models in R Using a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Example (2023) · cites this paper as [34]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 50 · Cited by 174
- Authors
- Welton, N. J., & Ades, A. E.
- Affiliations
- Medical Research Council (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Welton, Nicky J.
- Venue
- Medical Decision Making
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-11
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 633-645
- ISSN
- 0272-989X (ISSN-L)
- 1552-681X
- OpenAlex
- W2158719122
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 4.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Medical Decision Making (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
- Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Bristol
- Medical Research Council
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Probability and Statistical Research
- Keywords
- Markov transition probabilities, transition rates, multi-state models, disease progression modeling, Fokker-Planck equation, partially observed data, error propagation, Bayesian estimation, evidence synthesis, model calibration, Markov chain Monte Carlo, WinBUGS
- MeSH terms
- Calibration, Humans, Markov Chains, Models, Theoretical, Probability, Disease Progression
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