Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T17:48:44.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Estimation, calibration, and validation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2014

M. G. Myriam Hunink
Affiliation:
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
Milton C. Weinstein
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Massachusetts
Eve Wittenberg
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health, Massachusetts
Michael F. Drummond
Affiliation:
University of York
Joseph S. Pliskin
Affiliation:
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
John B. Wong
Affiliation:
Tufts University, Massachusetts
Paul P. Glasziou
Affiliation:
Bond University, Queensland
Get access

Summary

Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful.

George E. P. Box

Introduction

As discussed in Chapter 8, ‘good decision analyses depend on both the veracity of the decision model and the validity of the individual data elements.’ The validity of each individual data element relies on the comprehensiveness of the literature search for the best and most appropriate study or studies, criteria for selecting the source studies, the design of the study or studies, and methods for synthesizing the data from multiple sources. Nonetheless, Sir Michael David Rawlins avers that ‘Decision makers have to incorporate judgements, as part of their appraisal of the evidence, in reaching their conclusions. Such judgements relate to the extent to which each of the components of the evidence base is “fit for purpose.” Is it reliable?’(1) Because the integration of a multitude of these ‘best available’ data elements forms the basis for model results, some individuals refer to decision analyses as black boxes, so this last question applies particularly to the overall model predictions. Consequently, assessing model validity becomes paramount. However, prior to assessing model validity, model construction requires attention to parameter estimation and model calibration. This chapter focuses on parameter estimation, calibration, and validation in the context of Markov and, more generally, state-transition models (Chapter 10) in which recurrent events may occur over an extended period of time. The process of parameter estimation, calibration, and validation is iterative: it involves both adjustment of the data to fit the model and adjustment of the model to fit the data.

Parameter estimation

Survival analysis involves determining the probability that an event such as death or disease progression will occur over time. The events modeled in survival analysis are called ‘failure’ events, because once they occur, they cannot occur again. ‘Survival’ is the absence of the failure event. The failure event may be death, or it may be death combined with a non-fatal outcome such as developing cancer or having a heart attack, in which case the absence of the event is referred to as event-free survival. Commonly used methods for survival analysis include life-table analysis, Kaplan–Meier product limit estimates, and Cox proportional hazards models. A survival curve plots the probability of being alive over time (Figure 11.1).

Type
Chapter
Information
Decision Making in Health and Medicine
Integrating Evidence and Values
, pp. 334 - 355
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Rawlins, M. De testimonio: on the evidence for decisions about the use of therapeutic interventions. Lancet. 2008;372(9656):2152–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bradburn, MJ, Clark, TG, Love, SB, Altman, DG. Survival analysis part II: multivariate data analysis – an introduction to concepts and methods. Br J Cancer. 2003;89(3):431–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kleinbaum, DG, Klein, M. Survival Analysis: A Self-learning Text. 2nd edn: Springer; 2005.Google Scholar
Beck, JR, Kassirer, JP, Pauker, SG. A convenient approximation of life expectancy (the “DEALE”). I. Validation of the method. Am J Med. 1982;73(6):883–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuchural, GJ, Levey, AS, Pauker, SG. Kidney failure or cancer. Should immunosuppression be continued in a transplant patient with malignant melanoma?Med Decis Making. 1984;4(1):82–107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arias, E. United States Life Tables, 2008. National Vital Statistics Reports. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2012.Google Scholar
Kuntz, KM, Weinstein, MC. Life expectancy biases in clinical decision modeling. Med Decis Making. 1995;15(2):158–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weinstein, MC. Recent developments in decision-analytic modelling for economic evaluation. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(11):1043–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barton, P, Jobanputra, P, Wilson, J, Bryan, S, Burls, A. The use of modelling to evaluate new drugs for patients with a chronic condition: the case of antibodies against tumour necrosis factor in rheumatoid arthritis. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8(11):iii, 1–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mark, DB, Hlatky, MA, Califf, RM, et al. Cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy with tissue plasminogen activator as compared with streptokinase for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1995;332(21):1418–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eckman, MH, Rosand, J, Greenberg, SM, Gage, BF. Cost-effectiveness of using pharmacogenetic information in warfarin dosing for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150(2):73–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vanni, T, Karnon, J, Madan, J, et al. Calibrating models in economic evaluation: a seven-step approach. Pharmacoeconomics. 2011;29(1):35–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, JJ, Kuntz, KM, Stout, NK, et al. Multiparameter calibration of a natural history model of cervical cancer. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;166(2):137–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, DC, Pawar, V, Kruzikas, D, et al. Calibrating longitudinal models to cross-sectional data: the effect of temporal changes in health practices. Value Health. 2011;14(5):700–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, DC, Pawar, V, Kruzikas, DT, et al. Incorporating calibrated model parameters into sensitivity analyses: deterministic and probabilistic approaches. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30(2):119–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, DC, Pawar, V, Kruzikas, D, et al. Methods of model calibration: observations from a mathematical model of cervical cancer. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(11):995–1000.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kong, CY, McMahon, PM, Gazelle, GS. Calibration of disease simulation model using an engineering approach. Value Health. 2009;12(4):521–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rutter, CM, Miglioretti, DL, Savarino, JE. Bayesian calibration of microsimulation models. J Am Stat Assoc. 2009;104(488):1338–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stout, NK, Knudsen, AB, Kong, CY, McMahon, PM, Gazelle, GS. Calibration methods used in cancer simulation models and suggested reporting guidelines. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27(7):533–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garnett, GP, Cousens, S, Hallett, TB, Steketee, R, Walker, N. Mathematical models in the evaluation of health programmes. Lancet. 2011;378(9790):515–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nijhuis, RL, Stijnen, T, Peeters, A, et al. Apparent and internal validity of a Monte Carlo-Markov model for cardiovascular disease in a cohort follow-up study. Med Decis Making. 2006;26(2):134–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Kempen, BJ, Ferket, BS, Hofman, A, et al. Validation of a model to investigate the effects of modifying cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors on the burden of CVD: the Rotterdam ischemic heart disease and stroke computer simulation (RISC) model. BMC Med. 2012;10:158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fryback, DG, Stout, NK, Rosenberg, MA, et al. The Wisconsin Breast Cancer Epidemiology Simulation Model. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;(36):37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chia, YL, Salzman, P, Plevritis, SK, Glynn, PW. Simulation-based parameter estimation for complex models: a breast cancer natural history modelling illustration. Stat Methods Med Res. 2004;13(6):507–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wong, JB, Koff, RS. Watchful waiting with periodic liver biopsy versus immediate empirical therapy for histologically mild chronic hepatitis C. A cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133(9):665–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Provenzale, D, Schmitt, C, Wong, JB. Barrett’s esophagus: a new look at surveillance based on emerging estimates of cancer risk. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94(8):2043–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whyte, S, Walsh, C, Chilcott, J. Bayesian calibration of a natural history model with application to a population model for colorectal cancer. Med Decis Making. 2011;31(4):625–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kennedy, MC, O’Hagan, A. Bayesian calibration of computer models. J R Stat Soc: Series B (Statistical Methodology). 2001;63(3):425–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, JJ, Ortendahl, J, Goldie, SJ. Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus vaccination and cervical cancer screening in women older than 30 years in the United States. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(8):538–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eddy, DM, Hollingworth, W, Caro, JJ, et al. Model transparency and validation: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-7. Med Decis Making. 2012;32(5):733–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, M, Russell, LB, Paltiel, AD, et al. Conceptualizing a model: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-2. Med Decis Making. 2012;32(5):678–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hunink, MG, Goldman, L, Tosteson, AN, et al. The recent decline in mortality from coronary heart disease, 1980–1990. The effect of secular trends in risk factors and treatment. JAMA. 1997;277(7):535–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wong, JB. Pharmacogenomics of hepatitis C and decision analysis: a glimpse into the future. Hepatology. 2002;36(1):252–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zauber, AG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar, I, Knudsen, AB, et al. Evaluating test strategies for colorectal cancer screening: a decision analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149(9):659–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, DA, Cronin, KA, Plevritis, SK, et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(17):1784–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drummond, MF, Barbieri, M, Wong, JB. Analytic choices in economic models of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis: What makes a difference?Med Decis Making. 2005;25(5):520–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turner, D, Raftery, J, Cooper, K, et al. The CHD challenge: comparing four cost-effectiveness models. Value Health. 2011;14(1):53–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, LG, Thompson, SG. Uncertainty and validation of health economic decision models. Health Econ. 2010;19(1):43–55.Google ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×