A systematic review of whole disease models for informing healthcare resource allocation decisions

Author:

Jin HuajieORCID,Tappenden Paul,Ling Xiaoxiao,Robinson Stewart,Byford SarahORCID

Abstract

BackgroundWhole disease models (WDM) are large-scale, system-level models which can evaluate multiple decision questions across an entire care pathway. Whilst this type of model can offer several advantages as a platform for undertaking economic analyses, the availability and quality of existing WDMs is unknown.ObjectivesThis systematic review aimed to identify existing WDMs to explore which disease areas they cover, to critically assess the quality of these models and provide recommendations for future research.MethodsAn electronic search was performed on multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the Health Technology Assessment database) on 23rd July 2023. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion. Study quality was assessed using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) appraisal checklist for economic evaluations. Model characteristics were descriptively summarised.ResultsForty-four WDMs were identified, of which thirty-two were developed after 2010. The main disease areas covered by existing WDMs are heart disease, cancer, acquired immune deficiency syndrome and metabolic disease. The quality of included WDMs is generally low. Common limitations included failure to consider the harms and costs of adverse events (AEs) of interventions, lack of probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and poor reporting.ConclusionsThere has been an increase in the number of WDMs since 2010. However, their quality is generally low which means they may require significant modification before they could be re-used, such as modelling AEs of interventions and incorporation of PSA. Sufficient details of the WDMs need to be reported to allow future reuse/adaptation.

Funder

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council

Publisher

Public Library of Science (PLoS)

Subject

Multidisciplinary

Reference93 articles.

1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London, UK: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2013.

2. Scottish Medicines Consortium. Guidance to manufacturers for completion of new product assessment form (NPAF). Glasgow, UK: Scottish Medicines Consortium; 2007.

3. Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Guidelines for preparing submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (Version 4.5). Canberra, Australia: Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee; 2015.

4. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Procedure and Submission Guidelines for the CADTH Common Drug Review. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2019.

5. Economic evaluation of mental health interventions: an introduction to cost-utility analysis;J Luyten;Evidence-based mental health,2016

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3