Cited by 220Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsEvaluation and Performance Assessment

Recent developments in decision-analytic modelling for economic evaluation

Weinstein, Milton C·2006·PharmacoEconomics

Abstract

The past few years have seen rapid changes in the methods of decision-analytic modelling of healthcare programmes for the purposes of economic evaluation. This paper focuses on four developments in modelling that have emerged over the past few years or have become more widely used. First, no one optimal method for extrapolating outcomes from clinical trials has yet been established. Modellers may draw from a set of varied assumptions about survival extrapolation that encompass a range of possibilities from highly optimistic to extremely cautious. Secondly, the practicality and appeal of microsimulation as a method for analysing healthcare decision problems has increased dramatically with the speed of computing technology. Individual instantiations of a system are generated by using a random process to draw from probability distributions a large number of times (also known as Monte Carlo or probabilistic simulation). Microsimulation is moving in new directions, such as discrete-event simulations that simulate sequences of events by drawing directly from probability distributions of event times; this approach is now being broadly applied to model situations where populations of patients interact with healthcare delivery systems. Microsimulation modelling of transmission systems at the population level is also rapidly developing. Thirdly, model calibration is emerging as a new tool that may offer health scientists a means of generating important fundamental knowledge about disea…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2165/00019053-200624110-00002

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?

  • The cohort and individual-based state-transition frameworks focused on in this report do not capture interactions, model a single closed cohort, and allow transitions to occur only at specified time intervals.

    “These frameworks do not capture interactions, model a single (closed) cohort, and allow transitions to occur only at specified time intervals.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Weinstein, M. C.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Weinstein, Milton C
Venue
PharmacoEconomics
Published
2006
Volume
24
Issue
11
Pages
1043-1053
ISSN
1170-7690 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2069995517
Cited by
220
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 17
FWCI
38.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • PharmacoEconomics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Simulation Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Keywords
decision-analytic modeling, survival extrapolation, microsimulation, discrete event simulation, model calibration, transmission model, vaccination, cost-effectiveness analysis, secondary benefits, differential equation model, evidence synthesis
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Computer Simulation, Decision Making, Organizational, Decision Support Techniques, Delivery of Health Care, Disease Transmission, Infectious

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