Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Review of Web-Based Tools for Value-of-Information Analysis

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Value-of-information analysis (VOI) is a decision-theoretic approach that is used to inform reimbursement decisions, optimise trial design and set research priorities. The application of VOI analysis for informing policy decisions in practice has been limited due, in part, to the perceived complexity associated with the calculation of VOI measures. Recent efforts have resulted in the development of efficient methods to estimate VOI measures and the development of user-friendly web-based tools to facilitate VOI calculations. We review the existing web-based tools including Sheffield Accelerated Value of Information (SAVI), the web interface to the BCEA (Bayesian Cost-Effectiveness Analysis) R package (BCEAweb), Rapid Assessment of Need for Evidence (RANE), and Value of Information for Cardiovascular Trials and Other Comparative Research (VICTOR). We describe what each tool is designed to do, the inputs they require, and the outputs they produce. Finally, we discuss how tools for VOI calculations might be improved in the future to facilitate the use of VOI analysis in practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fenwick E, Steuten L, Knies S, Ghabri S, Basu A, Murray JF, et al. Value of information analysis for research decisions-an introduction: report 1 of the ISPOR value of Information Analysis Emerging Good Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2020;23(2):139–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Tuffaha HW, Aitken J, Chambers S, Scuffham PA. A framework to prioritise health research proposals for funding: integrating value for money. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2019;17(6):761–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tuffaha HW, Gordon LG, Scuffham PA. Value of information analysis informing adoption and research decisions in a portfolio of health care interventions. MDM Policy Pract. 2016;1(1):2381468316642238.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. McKenna C, Soares M, Claxton K, Bojke L, Griffin S, Palmer S, et al. Unifying research and reimbursement decisions: case studies demonstrating the sequence of assessment and judgments required. Value Health. 2015;18(6):865–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tuffaha HW, Reynolds H, Gordon LG, Rickard CM, Scuffham PA. Value of information analysis optimizing future trial design from a pilot study on catheter securement devices. Clin Trials. 2014;11(6):648–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rothery C, Strong M, Koffijberg HE, Basu A, Ghabri S, Knies S, et al. Value of information analytical methods: report 2 of the ISPOR Value of Information Analysis Emerging Good Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2020;23(3):277–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Tuffaha HW, Gordon LG, Scuffham PA. Value of information analysis in healthcare: a review of principles and applications. J Med Econ. 2014;17(6):377–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Steuten L, van de Wetering G, Groothuis-Oudshoorn K, Retèl V. A systematic and critical review of the evolving methods and applications of value of information in academia and practice. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31(1):25–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Briggs A, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. Oxford University Press; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kunst N, Wilson ECF, Glynn D, Alarid-Escudero F, Baio G, Brennan A, et al. Computing the expected value of sample information efficiently: practical guidance and recommendations for four model-based methods. Value Health. 2020;23(6):734–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Heath A, Kunst N, Jackson C, Strong M, Alarid-Escudero F, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, et al. Calculating the expected value of sample information in practice: considerations from 3 case studies. Med Decis Mak. 2020;40(3):314–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. The Collaborative Network for Value of Information (ConVOI). https://www.convoi-group.org/. Accessed 05 Jan 2021.

  13. Strong M, Oakley JE, Brennan A. Estimating multiparameter partial expected value of perfect information from a probabilistic sensitivity analysis sample: a nonparametric regression approach. Med Decis Mak. 2014;34(3):311–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Strong M, Oakley JE, Brennan A, Breeze P. Estimating the expected value of sample information using the probabilistic sensitivity analysis sample: a fast, nonparametric regression-based method. Med Decis Mak. 2015;35(5):570–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Grimm SE, Strong M, Brennan A, Wailoo AJ. The HTA risk analysis chart: visualising the need for and potential value of Managed Entry Agreements in Health Technology Assessment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35(12):1287–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Baio G, Berardi A, Heath A. BCEAweb: a user-friendly web-app to use BCEA. In: Bayesian cost-effectiveness analysis with the R package BCEA. Springer: Cham; 2017. p. 153–66.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Baio G, Hadjipanayiotou P, Berardi A, Heath A. Bayesian cost effectiveness analysis (BCEA).  https://egon.stats.ucl.ac.uk/projects/BCEAweb/. Accessed 05 Jan 2021.

  18. Basu A, Veenstra DL, Carlson JJ, Wang WJ, Branch K, Probstfield J. How can clinical researchers quantify the value of their proposed comparative research? Am Heart J. 2019;209:116–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Meltzer DO, Hoomans T, Chung JW, Basu A. Minimal modeling approaches to value of information analysis for health research. Med Decis Mak. 2011;31(6):E1-e22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Claxton K, Griffin S, Koffijberg H, McKenna C. How to estimate the health benefits of additional research and changing clinical practice. BMJ (Clin Res ed). 2015;351:h5987.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rapid Assessment of Need for Evidence (RANE). https://shiny.york.ac.uk/rane/. Accessed 05 Jan 2021.

  22. Value of Information for Cardiovascular Trials and Other Comparative Research (VICTOR). https://sop.washington.edu/choice/research/research-projects/victor/. Accessed 05 Jan 2021.

  23. Basu A, Meltzer D. Decision criterion and value of information analysis: optimal aspirin dosage for secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. Med Decis Mak. 2018;38(4):427–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Carlson JJ, Chen S, Garrison LP Jr. Performance-based risk-sharing arrangements: an updated international review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35(10):1063–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tuffaha HW, Scuffham PA. The Australian managed entry scheme: are we getting it right? Pharmacoeconomics. 2018;36(5):555–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Tuffaha HW, Roberts S, Chaboyer W, Gordon LG, Scuffham PA. Cost-effectiveness and value of information analysis of nutritional support for preventing pressure ulcers in high-risk patients: implement now, research later. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2015;13(2):167–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Jackson C. VOI: a generic package to calculate the expected value of information. https://chjackson.github.io/voi/. Accessed 05 Jan 2021.

  28. Andronis L. Analytic approaches for research priority-setting: issues, challenges and the way forward. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2015;15(5):745–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Koffijberg H, Knies S, Janssen MP. The impact of decision makers’ constraints on the outcome of value of information analysis. Value Health. 2018;21(2):203–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tuffaha HW, El Saifi N, Chambers SK, Scuffham PA. Directing research funds to the right research projects: a review of criteria used by research organisations in Australia in prioritising health research projects for funding. BMJ Open. 2018;8(12):e026207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Woods B, Schmitt L, Rothery C, Phillips A, Hallett TB, Revill P, et al. Practical metrics for establishing the health benefits of research to support research prioritisation. BMJ Glob Health. 2020;5(8):e002152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Wilson EC. A practical guide to value of information analysis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33(2):105–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for the Business and Economics of Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4067, Australia

    Haitham Tuffaha & Stephen Birch

  2. Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK

    Claire Rothery

  3. Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

    Natalia Kunst

  4. Public Health Modeling Unit, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA

    Natalia Kunst

  5. Medical Research Council Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Chris Jackson

  6. School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

    Mark Strong

Authors
  1. Haitham Tuffaha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claire Rothery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Natalia Kunst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chris Jackson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mark Strong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Stephen Birch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haitham Tuffaha.

Ethics declarations

Funding

Haitham Tuffaha is funded by an NHMRC Early Career Fellowship (GNT1121232).

Conflicts of interest/Competing interests

MS, CJ and CR were involved in the development of some of the tools reviewed. HT, NK and SB have no conflicts of interest.

Author contributions

HT conceptualised and drafted the manuscript. All authors critically revised the manuscript and approved the final version.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tuffaha, H., Rothery, C., Kunst, N. et al. A Review of Web-Based Tools for Value-of-Information Analysis. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 19, 645–651 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-021-00662-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-021-00662-4

Search

Navigation