Identification of evidence for key parameters for health economic models used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of health care technologies
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives. The objective of this PhD study was to compare different information retrieval methods that can be used to identify health economic model inputs. Methods. Existing search methods were compared to two alternatives (iterative searching and rapid review), using three health technology assessment (HTA) case studies in ulcerative colitis, thyroid cancer and breast cancer tumour profiling risk stratification. Key criteria for selecting the case studies were the availability of an executable Excel model. Two model inputs were chosen to be tested: health state utilities and baseline risk of clinical events. Usual practice searches were updated, and alternative search methods (iterative searching and rapid review) were conducted, and the differences in model inputs identified by each search approach were analysed. Differences were evaluated in terms of time taken to search, sensitivity, burden (precision and number needed to read) and relevance of identified information. The identified model input values were tested in an executable health economic model, and, when feasible, the model results were compared in order to understand the impact on model outputs. Results. Usual practice for identifying health state utility inputs was a systematic review in all except one case study, where a previous health economic model output was used. In all case studies the alternative search methods were mostly less resource intensive and resulted in identical or similar model inputs, with no changes to the conclusions drawn from the health economic model. Usual practice for identifying baseline risk of clinical events varied from no recorded search steps to a systematic review. When the effort for usual practice could not be estimated due to the lack of recorded search steps, the time difference could not be estimated. However, it was clear that applying alternative search methods increased the transparency. Conclusions. Alternative search methods were more efficient and more transparent than established search methods, without impacting the health economic model conclusions. Further case studies are required to examine whether this conclusion remains generalisable, and applies to other health economic model inputs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle