Cited by 18Global Cancer Incidence and ScreeningHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer

A two-step Markov processes approach for parameterization of cancer state-transition models for low- and middle-income countries

Gopalappa, Chaitra, Guo, Jiachen, Meckoni, Prashant, Munkhbat, Buyannemekh, Pretorius, Carel, Lauer, Jeremy, Ilbawi, André, Bertram, Melanie·2018·Medical Decision Making

Abstract

Implementation of organized cancer screening and prevention programs in high-income countries (HICs) has considerably decreased cancer-related incidence and mortality. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), screening and early diagnosis programs are generally unavailable, and most cancers are diagnosed in late stages when survival is very low. Analyzing the cost-effectiveness of alternative cancer control programs and estimating resource needs will help prioritize interventions in LMICs. However, mathematical models of natural cancer onset and progression needed to conduct the economic analyses are predominantly based on populations in HICs because the longitudinal data on screening and diagnoses required for parameterization are unavailable in LMICs. Models currently used for LMICs mostly concentrate on directly calculating the shift in distribution of cancer diagnosis as an evaluative measure of screening. We present a mathematical methodology for the parameterization of natural cancer onset and progression, specifically for LMICs that do not have longitudinal data. This full onset and progression model can help conduct comprehensive analyses of cancer control programs, including cancer screening, by considering both the positive impact of screening as well as any adverse consequences, such as over-diagnosis and false-positive results. The methodology has been applied to breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers for 2 regions, under the World Health Organization catego…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0272989x18759482

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.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gopalappa, C., Guo, J., Meckoni, P., Munkhbat, B., Pretorius, C., Lauer, J., Ilbawi, A., & Bertram, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Massachusetts Amherst (US)
  • Avenir Health (US)
  • World Health Organization (CH)
Corresponding author
Gopalappa, Chaitra
Venue
Medical Decision Making
Published
2018-03-24
Volume
38
Issue
4
Pages
520-530
ISSN
  • 0272-989X (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-681X
OpenAlex
W2790203549
Cited by
18
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 2
FWCI
0.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Medical Decision Making (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
World Health Organization
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • 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 Financial Impacts of Cancer
Keywords
model parameterization, low- and middle-income countries, cancer screening, tumor progression, natural history of cancer, overdiagnosis, false positives, breast cancer, cervical cancer, colorectal cancer, cancer control programs, cost-effectiveness, Eastern Sub-Saharan Africa, Southeast Asia
MeSH terms
Breast Neoplasms, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Developing Countries, Female, Humans, Markov Chains, Models, Theoretical, Neoplasms, Colorectal Neoplasms, Early Detection of Cancer

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