Transcript Slide 1
New Research in
Economic Modeling
and Simulation
Greg Samsa PhD
Organization of the talk
3
questions
How
does your work contribute to
economic and comparative effectiveness
modeling?
What’s new in economic modeling and
simulation?
What’s changing in how these models are
applied?
Question 1
How
does your work contribute to
economic and comparative
effectiveness modeling?
Short answer: You provide the
inputs
Question 2
What’s
new in economic modeling
and simulation?
Short answer: Very complex
models are now computationally
feasible – the debate is shifting
from what is possible to what is
desired
Question 3
What’s
changing in how these
models are applied?
Short answer: Decision makers are
starting to take these models more
seriously, and to embed them
within more general strategies for
learning
Background
The
previous speakers have
provided definitions and examples
of economic models
I’ll discuss “complex decision and
cost-effectiveness models” –
sufficiently complex to require
simulation to implement
Observation 1
A
CEA model is a peculiar thing
It
is a counting machine intended to clarify
trade-offs among things that users value
(e.g., survival, quality of life, costs)
Inputs are obtained from different sources
– “the model” isn’t something that can be
directly observed
The usual principles of validation don’t
apply
– I’ll discuss what makes a good model later
Observation 2
A
dirty little secret:
A
CEA model is no stronger than its
weakest link
Advocates focus on a model’s strengths,
but the weaknesses are also of importance
A personal confession
“The
Duke Stroke Policy Model
combines data from the best
sources – natural history from
Framingham, costs from national
claims, utilities from a large survey
developed specifically for this
purpose…”
All true, but…
Its
conclusions depend on how
survival, quality of life and costs
vary by disability level
These
parameters were derived by
extrapolating from small studies of
inconsistent quality
The user is essentially relying on (a) the
face validity of the parameter estimates;
and (b) sensitivity analyses
N=?
Natural
history n=5,000
Costs n=500,000
Utilities n=1,500
Natural
history, costs, utilities by disease
state – n is variable (e.g., only 100
hemorrhagic strokes)
Impact of disability level n=20, mostly
interview rather than observation
Question 1
How
does your work contribute to
economic and cost-effectiveness
models?
Data sources for model inputs
Traditional
efficacy trials
Effectiveness trials
Registries
Administrative data
Surveys
Observational studies
Literature reviews
Study planning
Design
studies to improve
estimates of parameters that are:
Important
(e.g., using sensitivity analysis)
Currently estimated with bias or
imprecision
Implication
CEA
models can not only organize
thinking, decision making and
communication about a topic, but
can also be used to help set an
agenda for research
Question 2
What’s
new in economic modeling
and simulation?
Bayesian approach
A
general approach to CEA
modeling
All
parameter estimates are based on prior
distributions
Ideally, correlations among parameters are
considered
Ideally, these distributions reflect the
impact of covariates
The output – posterior distributions –
reflects the impact of uncertainty
Example output
“Uncertainty
in all the model
parameters was addressed using
(a) prior distributions; and (b)
resampling – in >95% of
replications of the simulation the
ICER was <$20,000/QALY…”
Advantages
This
is a general, intellectually
coherent way of modeling
Now computationally feasible
Europeans and analysts like it
A more sophisticated treatment of
uncertainty than 1- and multi-way
sensitivity analysis
Disadvantages
Possible
loss of transparency
Parameter estimates might not be
possible / practical to obtain
Easy for the model to take on a life
of its own
What makes a good model?
Model structure focuses on core of the
issue
As simple as possible, but not too
simple
Model is transparent
Model inputs can be collected at the
required level of precision / quality
Opinion
Are
more structurally, technically
and computationally complex
models such as Bayesian CEA
models “good”?
My
opinion: sometimes
Question 3
What’s
changing in how CEA
models are applied?
Back in the day
“Your
health care organization
should place our acute stroke drug
on the formulary because its ICER
indicates that it is good value for
the money…”
Problems
The decision maker doesn’t have the same
societal perspective as the analyst
The analysis ignores silos
Even with discounting, lifetime impact is less
important to the decision maker than short
term impacts
Unless accompanied by a back-of-the
envelope calculation, the result isn’t
transparent
Example
A
back of the envelope model
Suppose
that an acute stroke drug keeps 2
people per 100 out of nursing homes. If
they survive 3 years at $50,000 per year,
the excess cost is $300,000 per 100
patients, or $3,000 per patient. So long as
it costs less than $3,000, an acute stroke
treatment that is even marginally effective
is likely to be cost-effective as well.
Current trends
With
calculations becoming less
burdensome, it is easier to
produced customized models
• (e.g., including only costs of interest to
the decision maker)
Model
results are embedded within
more realistic frameworks such as
comparative effectiveness
Ideal framework
Transparent
Includes
as many of the elements
of interest to the decision maker as
possible
CEA model is descriptive, not
prescriptive
Example
As
an example of a formal decision
making process intended to satisfy
these criteria, I’ll describe how the
oncology clinics at Duke
systematically learn
CEA
models are one (albeit not the only)
tool that we use
Oncology modeling at Duke
Rapid
learning cancer clinics
Combine sound data collection
with an explicit mechanism for
learning
Data
A
data warehouse is used to
generate multiple views, typically
derived from linked files (e.g.,
cancer type, treatments, outcomes)
The lynchpin is a data set of
patient-reported outcomes (derived
from the PCM)
Data quality
The PCM contains 70+ items on a 0-10
scale (e.g., level of nausea during last 7
days)
Filled out in waiting room using etablets – migrating to web
Results are reported to clinicians in real
time – for example, highlighting issues
to discuss during the visit
Incentives
Patients:
confident that their
concerns won’t be overlooked
Physicians: saves time in
performing a review of symptoms
Principle:
(Sufficiently) valid data are
produced by design, not by accident
Formal learning structure
Learning
from the databases
occurs within a formal PDCA cycle
Relevant
stakeholders are represented
The stakeholders determine the level of
accuracy / precision required to make
decisions
The stakeholders determine study design
(e.g., interventional, observational)
Types of designs
Observational
designs with
undirected machine learning
Observational designs with prespecified hypotheses
Pre-post designs with
interventions
Randomized trials
Example
Is
it “worth it” to refer patients with
high levels of psychological
distress to specialized counseling?
Inputs
Observational data – natural history of
outcomes by level of distress
CEA model to estimate what level of
improvement would justify use of
specialized counseling resources
Literature review on expected impact of
counseling
Pre-post design to assess impact of
counseling in our setting
Criteria for learning
A
practice is worth changing if the
alternative is cost-effective
We use CEA models that are
simple to moderately complex
Comment
Our
goal is to systematically and
explicitly embed learning into our
usual procedures
Final thoughts
Health economics has always been
quantitative – now, it is becoming more
explicitly “statistical” as well
A statistically-inspired literature on CEA is
rapidly developing – a distinguishing
characteristic is the ability to accommodate
increasingly complex models through
advances in computation
Final thoughts
The
danger in this literature is that,
if its perspective is entirely
statistical, it can become divorced
from reality
A particular area of promise lies in
integrating CEA modeling with
modern systematic approaches to
learning