Methods to Quantify the Importance of Parameters for Model Updating and Distributional Adaptation

David Glynn, Susan Griffin, Nils Gutacker and Simon Walker
Additional contact information
David Glynn: Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK
Susan Griffin: Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK
Nils Gutacker: Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK
Simon Walker: Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK

Medical Decision Making, 2024, vol. 44, issue 7, 802-810

Abstract: Purpose Decision models are time-consuming to develop; therefore, adapting previously developed models for new purposes may be advantageous. We provide methods to prioritize efforts to 1) update parameter values in existing models and 2) adapt existing models for distributional cost-effectiveness analysis (DCEA). Methods Methods exist to assess the influence of different input parameters on the results of a decision models, including value of information (VOI) and 1-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA). We apply 1) VOI to prioritize searches for additional information to update parameter values and 2) OWSA to prioritize searches for parameters that may vary by socioeconomic characteristics. We highlight the assumptions required and propose metrics that quantify the extent to which parameters in a model have been updated or adapted. We provide R code to quickly carry out the analysis given inputs from a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and demonstrate our methods using an oncology case study. Results In our case study, updating 2 of 21 probabilistic model parameters addressed 71.5% of the total VOI and updating 3 addressed approximately 100% of the uncertainty. Our proposed approach suggests that these are the 3 parameters that should be prioritized. For model adaptation for DCEA, 46.3% of the total OWSA variation came from a single parameter, while the top 10 input parameters were found to account for more than 95% of the total variation, suggesting efforts should be aimed toward these. Conclusions These methods offer a systematic approach to guide research efforts in updating models with new data or adapting models to undertake DCEA. The case study demonstrated only very small gains from updating more than 3 parameters or adapting more than 10 parameters. Highlights It can require considerable analyst time to search for evidence to update a model or to adapt a model to take account of equity concerns. In this article, we provide a quantitative method to prioritze parameters to 1) update existing models to reflect potential new evidence and 2) adapt existing models to estimate distributional outcomes. We define metrics that quantify the extent to which the parameters in a model have been updated or adapted. We provide R code that can quickly rank parameter importance and calculate quality metrics using only the results of a standard probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

Keywords: sensitivity analysis; value of information; distributional cost effectivness analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X241262037 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:44:y:2024:i:7:p:802-810

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X241262037

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().