A Systematic and Critical Review of the Evolving Methods and Applications of Value of Information in Academia and Practice
- 534 Downloads
This article provides a systematic and critical review of the evolving methods and applications of value of information (VOI) in academia and practice and discusses where future research needs to be directed.
Published VOI studies were identified by conducting a computerized search on Scopus and ISI Web of Science from 1980 until December 2011 using pre-specified search terms. Only full-text papers that outlined and discussed VOI methods for medical decision making, and studies that applied VOI and explicitly discussed the results with a view to informing healthcare decision makers, were included. The included papers were divided into methodological and applied papers, based on the aim of the study.
A total of 118 papers were included of which 50 % (n = 59) are methodological. A rapidly accumulating literature base on VOI from 1999 onwards for methodological papers and from 2005 onwards for applied papers is observed. Expected value of sample information (EVSI) is the preferred method of VOI to inform decision making regarding specific future studies, but real-life applications of EVSI remain scarce. Methodological challenges to VOI are numerous and include the high computational demands, dealing with non-linear models and interdependency between parameters, estimations of effective time horizons and patient populations, and structural uncertainties.
VOI analysis receives increasing attention in both the methodological and the applied literature bases, but challenges to applying VOI in real-life decision making remain. For many technical and methodological challenges to VOI analytic solutions have been proposed in the literature, including leaner methods for VOI. Further research should also focus on the needs of decision makers regarding VOI.
KeywordsHealth Technology Assessment Structural Uncertainty Applied Paper Methodological Paper High Computational Demand
No sources of funding were used to prepare this article. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to its content and the opinions expressed in the article are those of the authors. The authors gratefully acknowledge Prof. Dr. Maarten IJzerman for sharing his thoughtful insights regarding the role of VOI methods in academia and practice, and for facilitating the performance of this extensive review at the Department of Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, The Netherlands.
Lotte Steuten conceived and planned the review, contributed to acquisition, analysis and interpretation of the data, drafted the paper, made substantive suggestions for revision, approved the final submitted version and acts as guarantor for the overall content. Gijs van de Wetering contributed to acquisition, analysis and interpretation of the data, drafted the paper, made substantive suggestions for revision, and approved the final submitted version. Karin Groothuis-Oudshoorn and Valesca Retèl contributed to acquisition, analysis and interpretation of the data, made substantive suggestions for revision and approved the final submitted version.
- 2.Raiffa H. Decision analysis: introductory lectures on choices under uncertainty. New York: Random House; 1968.Google Scholar
- 3.Pratt JW, Raiffa H, Schlaifer RO. Introduction to statistical decision theory. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1995.Google Scholar
- 5.Howard RA. The foundations of decision analysis. IEEE Transact Sys Sci Cybern. 1986;SSC4(3):211–9.Google Scholar
- 21.Philips Z, Claxton KP, Palmer S, Bojke L, Sculpher MJ. Priority setting for research in health care: an application of value of information analysis to glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22(3):379–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Townsend J, Buxton M, Harper G. Prioritisation of health technology assessment. The PATHS model: methods and case studies. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7(20):iii,1–82.Google Scholar
- 26.Chilcott J, Brennan A, Booth A, Karnon J, Tappenden P. The role of modelling in prioritising and planning clinical trials. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7(23):iii,1–125.Google Scholar
- 35.Myers E, Sanders GD, Ravi D, et al. Evaluating the potential use of modeling and value-of-information analysis for future research prioritization within the evidence-based practice center program [publication no. 11-EHC030-EF]. Future Research Needs: Methods Research Series. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2011. http://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/index.cfm/search-for-guides-reviews-and-reports/?productid=700&pageaction=displayproduct. Accessed 11 Nov 2012.
- 37.Meltzer D. Addressing uncertainty in medical cost-effectiveness analysis: implications of expected utility maximization for methods to perform sensitivity analysis and the use of cost-effectiveness analysis to set priorities for medical research. J Health Econ. 2001;20(1):109–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.Tappenden P, Chilcott JB, Eggington S, Oakley J, McCabe C. Methods for expected value of information analysis in complex health economic models: developments on the health economics of interferon-beta and glatiramer acetate for multiple sclerosis. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8(27):iii,1–78.Google Scholar
- 46.Barton GR, Briggs AH, Fenwick EAL. Optimal cost-effectiveness decisions: the role of the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC), the cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF), and the expected value of perfection information (EVPI). Value Health. 2008;11(5):886–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 48.Fenwick E, Marshall DA, Blackhouse G, Vidaillet H, Slee A, Shemanski L, et al. Assessing the impact of censoring of costs and effects on health-care decision-making: an example using the atrial fibrillation follow-up investigation of rhythm management (AFFIRM) study. Value Health. 2008;11(3):365–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 69.Ginnelly L, Manca A. The use of decision models in mental health economic evaluation: challenges and opportunities. Appl Health Econ and Health Policy. 2003;2(3):157–64.Google Scholar
- 78.Robinson M, Palmer S, Sculpher M, Philips Z, Ginnelly L, Bowens A, et al. Cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies for the initial medical management of non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome: systematic review and decision-analytical modelling. Health Technol Assess. 2005;9(27):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1–158.Google Scholar
- 80.Castelnuovo E, Thompson-Coon J, Pitt M, Cramp M, Siebert U, Price A, et al. The cost-effectiveness of testing for hepatitis C in former injecting drug users. Health Technol Assess. 2006;10(32):iii-iv, ix-xii, 1–93.Google Scholar
- 87.Colbourn T, Asseburg C, Bojke L, Philips Z, Claxton K, Ades AE, et al. Prenatal screening and treatment strategies to prevent group B streptococcal and other bacterial infections in early infancy: cost-effectiveness and expected value of information analyses. Health Technol Assess. 2007;11(29):21–108.Google Scholar
- 88.Collins R, Fenwick E, Trowman R, Perard R, Norman G, Light K, et al. A systematic review and economic model of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of docetaxel in combination with prednisone or prednisolone for the treatment of hormone-refractory metastatic prostate cancer. Health Technol Assess. 2007;11(2):iii-iv, xv-xviii, 1–179.Google Scholar
- 91.Griebsch I, Knowles RL, Brown J, Bull C, Wren C, Dezateux CA. Comparing the clinical and economic effects of clinical examination, pulse oximetry, and echocardiography in newborn screening for congenital heart defects: a probabilistic cost-effectiveness model and value of information analysis. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007;23(2):192–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 95.Grant A, Wileman S, Ramsay C, et al. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of minimal access surgery amongst people with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a UK collaborative study. The REFLUX trial. Health Technol Assess. 2008;12(31):1–181, iii-iv.Google Scholar
- 103.Black C, Clar C, Henderson R, MacEachern C, McNamee P, Quayyum Z, et al. The clinical effectiveness of glucosamine and chondroitin supplements in slowing or arresting progression of osteoarthritis of the knee: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2009;13(52):1–123.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 108.McKenna C, McDaid C, Suekarran S, Hawkins N, Claxton K, Light K, et al. Enhanced external counterpulsation for the treatment of stable angina and heart failure: a systematic review and economic analysis. Health Technol Assess. 2009;13(24):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1–90.Google Scholar
- 110.Rogowski W, Burch J, Palmer S, Craigs C, Golder S, Woolacott N. The effect of different treatment durations of clopidogrel in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: a systematic review and value of information analysis. Health Technol Assess. 2009;13(31):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1–77.Google Scholar
- 111.Stevenson MD, Oakley JE, Lloyd Jones M, Brennan A, Compston JE, McCloskey EV, et al. The cost-effectiveness of an RCT to establish whether 5 or 10 years of bisphosphonate treatment is the better duration for women with a prior fracture. Med Decis Making. 2009;29(6):678–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 113.Xie F, Blackhouse G, Assasi N, Campbell K, Levin M, Bowen J, et al. Results of a model analysis to estimate cost utility and value of information for intravenous immunoglobulin in Canadian adults with chronic immune thrombocytopenic purpura. Clin Therapeutics. 2009;31(5):1082–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 119.Stevenson MD, Scope A, Sutcliffe PA, et al. Group cognitive behavioural therapy for postnatal depression: a systematic review of clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and value of information analyses. Health Technol Assess. 2010;14(44):1–107, iii-iv.Google Scholar
- 124.Nosyk B, Sharif B, Sun H, Cooper C. CIHR Canadian HIV Trials Network Influenza Vaccine Research Group. The cost-effectiveness and value of information of three influenza vaccination dosing strategies for individuals with human immunodeficiency virus. PLoS One. 2011;6(12):e27059.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 125.Purmonen TT, Pänkäläinen E, Turunen JH, Asseburg C, Martikainen JA. Short-course adjuvant trastuzumab therapy in early stage breast cancer in Finland: cost-effectiveness and value of information analysis based on the 5-year follow-up results of the FinHer Trial. Acta Oncol. 2011;50(3):344–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 134.Hammitt JK. Can more information increase uncertainty? Chance. 1995;8(3):15–36.Google Scholar
- 135.Hammitt JK, Shlyakther AI. The expected value of information and the probability of surprise. Risk Anal. 1999;19(1):135–52.Google Scholar