Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Systematic and Critical Review of the Evolving Methods and Applications of Value of Information in Academia and Practice

  • Systematic Review
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusion

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.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Eckermann S, Karnon J, Willan AR. The value of value of information. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(9):699–709.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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 

  4. Howard RA. Value of information lotteries. IEEE Transact Sys Sci Cybern. 1967;SSC3(1):54–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Howard RA. The foundations of decision analysis. IEEE Transact Sys Sci Cybern. 1986;SSC4(3):211–9.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Yokota F, Thompson KM. Value of information literature analysis: a review of applications in health risk management. Med Decis Making. 2004;24(3):287–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Eckermann S, Willan AR. Expected value of information and decision making in HTA. Health Econ. 2007;16(2):195–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Claxton K, Sculpher M, Drummond M. A rational framework for decision making by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Lancet. 2002;360(9334):711–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Eckermann S, Willan AR. Globally optimal trial design for local decision making. Health Econ. 2009;18:203–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Willan AR, Eckermann S. Optimal clinical trial design using value of information methods with imperfect implementation. Health Econ. 2010;19:549–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Eckermann S, Willan AR. Time and expected value of sample information wait for no patient. Value Health. 2008;11(3):522–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Thompson MS. Decision-analytic determination of study size: the case of electronic fetal monitoring. Med Decis Making. 1981;1(2):165–79.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Claxton K, Posnett J. An economic approach to clinical trial design and research priority setting. Health Econ. 1996;5(6):513–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Felli JC, Hazen GB. Sensitivity analysis and the expected value of perfect information. Med Decis Making. 1998;18(1):95–109.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Claxton K. Bayesian approaches to the value of information: implications for the regulation of new pharmaceuticals. Health Econ. 1999;18(3):269–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Claxton K, Thompson KM. A dynamic programming approach to the efficient design of clinical trials. J Health Econ. 2001;20(5):797–822.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Claxton K, Cohen JT, Neumann PJ. When is evidence sufficient? Health Aff. 2005;24(1):93–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sculpher M, Claxton K. Establishing the cost-effectiveness of new pharmaceuticals under conditions of uncertainty: when is there sufficient evidence? Value Health. 2005;8(4):431–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ades AE, Sutton AJ. Multiparameter evidence synthesis in epidemiology and medical decision-making: current approaches. J Roy Stat Soc A Sta. 2006;169(1):5–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fenwick E, Palmer S, Claxton K, Sculpher M, Abrams K, Sutton A. An iterative Bayesian approach to health technology assessment: application to a policy of preoperative optimization for patients undergoing major elective surgery. Med Decis Making. 2006;26(5):480–96.

    Article  PubMed  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Griffin S, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Decision analysis for resource allocation in health care. J Health Services Res Policy. 2008;13(Suppl. 3):23–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Welton NJ, Madan J, Ades AE. Are head-to-head trials of biologics needed? The role of value of information in arthritis research. Rheumatology. 2011;50(Suppl. 4):iv,19–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Claxton K, Neumann PJ, Araki S, Weinstein MC. Bayesian value-of-information analysis: an application to a policy model of Alzheimer’s disease. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001;17(1):38–55.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google 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 

  27. Yokota F, Thompson KM. Value of information analysis in environmental health risk management decisions: past, present, and future. Risk Anal. 2004;24(3):635–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Fleurence RL, Torgerson DJ. Setting priorities for research. Health Policy. 2004;69(1):1–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Sculpher MJ, Drummond MF. Analysis sans frontières: can we ever make economic evaluations generalisable across jurisdictions? Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(11):1087–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Willan AR. Clinical decision making and the expected value of information. Clin Trials. 2007;4(3):279–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Claxton K. Exploring uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(9):781–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Rojnik K, Naversnik K. Gaussian process metamodeling in Bayesian value of information analysis: a case of the complex health economic model for breast cancer screening. Value Health. 2008;11(2):240–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Goeree R, Levin L, Chandra K, et al. Health technology assessment and primary data collection for reducing uncertainty in decision making. J Am Coll Radiol. 2009;6(5):332–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Baio G, Russo P. A decision-theoretic framework for the application of cost-effectiveness analysis in regulatory processes. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27(8):645–55.

    Article  PubMed  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.

  36. Felli JC, Hazen GB. A Bayesian approach to sensitivity analysis. Health Econ. 1999;8(3):263–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Ades AE, Cliffe S. Markov chain Monte Carlo estimation of a multiparameter decision model: consistency of evidence and the accurate assessment of uncertainty. Med Decis Making. 2002;22(4):359–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Ades AE, Lu G, Claxton K. Expected value of sample information calculations in medical decision modelling. Med Decis Making. 2004;24(2):207–27.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google 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 

  41. Willan AR, Pinto EM. The value of information and optimal clinical trial design. Stat Med. 2005;24(12):1791–806.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Koerkamp BG, Hunink MGM, Stijnen T, Weinstein MC. Identifying key parameters in cost-effectiveness analysis using value of information: a comparison of methods. Health Econ. 2006;15(4):383–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Brennan A, Kharroubi S, O’Hagan A, Chilcott J. Calculating partial expected value of perfect information via Monte Carlo sampling algorithms. Med Decis Making. 2007;27(4):448–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Brennan A, Kharroubi SA. Efficient computation of partial expected value of sample information using Bayesian approximation. J Health Econ. 2007;26(1):122–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Brennan A, Kharroubi SA. Expected value of sample information for Weibull survival data. Health Econ. 2007;16(11):1205–25.

    Article  PubMed  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Coyle D, Oakley J. Estimating the expected value of partial perfect information: a review of methods. Eur J Health Econ. 2008;9(3):251–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Philips Z, Claxton K, Palmer S. The half-life of truth: what are appropriate time horizons for research decisions? Med Decis Making. 2008;28(3):287–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Welton NJ, Ades AE, Caldwell DM, Peters TJ. Research prioritization based on expected value of partial perfect information: a case-study on interventions to increase uptake of breast cancer screening. J Roy Stat Soc A Sta. 2008;171(4):807–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Groot Koerkamp B, Weinstein MC, Stijnen T, Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Hunink MG. Uncertainty and patient heterogeneity in medical decision models. Med Decis Making. 2010;30:194–205.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Hoyle M. Historical lifetimes of drugs in England: application to value of information and cost-effectiveness analyses. Value Health. 2010;13(8):885–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Barton P. What happens to value of information measures as the number of decision options increases? Health Econ. 2011;20(7):853–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Price MJ, Welton NJ, Briggs AH, Ades AE. Model averaging in the presence of structural uncertainty about treatment effects: influence on treatment decision and expected value of information. Value Health. 2011;14(2):205–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Welton N, Ades AE. Research decisions in the face of heterogeneity: what can a new study tell us? Health Econ. 2011. doi:10.1002/hec.1797.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Willan AR, Kowgier ME. Cost-effectiveness analysis of a multinational RCT with a binary measure of effectiveness and an interacting covariate. Health Econ. 2008;17(7):777–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Conti S, Claxton K. Dimensions of design space: a decision-theoretic approach to optimal research design. Med Decis Making. 2009;29(6):643–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Karnon J. Planning the efficient allocation of research funds: an adapted application of a non-parametric Bayesian value of information analysis. Health Policy. 2002;61(3):329–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Miller P. Role of pharmacoeconomic analysis in R&D decision making: when, where, how? Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(1):1–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Groot Koerkamp B, Hunink MGM, Stijnen T, Hammitt JK, Kuntz KM, Weinstein MC. Limitations of acceptability curves for presenting uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making. 2007;27(2):101–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Eckermann S, Briggs A, Willan AR. Health technology assessment in the cost-disutility plane. Med Decis Making. 2008;28(2):172–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Eckermann S, Willan AR. The option value of delay in health technology assessment. Med Decis Making. 2008;28(3):300–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M. The value of implementation and the value of information: combined and uneven development. Med Decis Making. 2008;28(1):21–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Willan AR. Optimal sample size determinations from an industry perspective based on the expected value of information. Clin Trials. 2008;5(6):587–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Hoomans T, Fenwick EAL, Palmer S, Claxton K. Value of information and value of implementation: application of an analytic framework to inform resource allocation decisions in metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Value Health. 2009;12(2):315–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Janssen MP, Koffijberg H. Enhancing value of information analyses. Value Health. 2009;12(6):935–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Griffin S, Welton NJ, Claxton K. Exploring the research decision space: the expected value of information for sequential research designs. Med Decis Making. 2010;30(2):155–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Lal JA, Schulte In den Bäumen T, Morré SA, Brand A. Public health and valorization of genome-based technologies: a new model. J Transl Med. 2011;9(1):207.

    Article  PubMed  Google 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 

  70. Fleurence RL. Setting priorities for research: a practical application of ‘payback’ and expected value of information. Health Econ. 2007;16(12):1345–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Bojke L, Claxton K, Sculpher MJ, Palmer S. Identifying research priorities: the value of information associated with repeat screening for age-related macular degeneration. Med Decis Making. 2008;28(1):33–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Groot Koerkamp B, Spronk S, Stijnen T, Hunink MG. Value of information analyses of economic randomized controlled trials: the treatment of intermittent claudication. Value Health. 2010;13(2):242–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Vallejo-Torres L, Steuten L, Parkinson B, Girling AJ, Buxton MJ. Integrating health economics into the product development cycle: a case study of absorbable pins for treating hallux valgus. Med Decis Making. 2011;31(4):596–610.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Woods B, Veenstra D, Hawkins N. Prioritizing pharmacogenetic research: a value of information analysis of CYP2D6 testing to guide breast cancer treatment. Value Health. 2011;14(8):989–1001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Claxton K, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, Philips Z, Palmer S. A pilot study on the use of decision theory and value of information analysis as part of the NHS Health Technology Assessment programme. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8(31):1–103, iii.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Ginnelly L, Claxton K, Sculpher MJ, Golder S. Using value of information analysis to inform publicly funded research priorities. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2005;4(1):37–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Martikainen JA, Kivioja A, Hallinen T, Vihinen P. Economic evaluation of temozolomide in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(8):803–15.

    Article  PubMed  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 

  79. Brown J, Welton NJ, Bankhead C, Richard SH, Roberts L, Tydeman C, et al. A Bayesian approach to analysing the cost-effectiveness of two primary care interventions aimed at improving attendance for breast screening. Health Econ. 2006;15(5):435–45.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  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 

  81. Claxton KP, Sculpher MJ. Using value of information analysis to prioritise health research: some lessons from recent UK experience. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(11):1055–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Garside R, Pitt M, Somerville M, Stein K, Price A, Gilbert N. Surveillance of Barrett’s oesophagus: exploring the uncertainty through systematic review, expert workshop and economic modelling. Health Technol Assess. 2006;10(8):1–142, iii-iv.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Henriksson M, Lundgren F, Carlsson P. Informing the efficient use of health care and health care research resources: the case of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in Sweden. Health Econ. 2006;15(12):1311–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Iglesias CP, Claxton K. Comprehensive decision-analytic model and Bayesian value-of-information analysis: pentoxifylline in the treatment of chronic venous leg ulcers. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(5):465–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Speight PM, Palmer S, Moles DR, Downer MC, Smith DH, Henriksson M, et al. The cost-effectiveness of screening for oral cancer in primary care. Health Technol Assess. 2006;10(14):1–65.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Bojke L, Hornby E, Sculpher M. A comparison of the cost effectiveness of pharmacotherapy or surgery (laparoscopic fundoplication) in the treatment of GORD. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(10):829–41.

    Article  PubMed  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 

  89. Dong H, Coyle D, Buxton M. Value of information analysis for a new technology: computer-assisted total knee replacement. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007;23(3):337–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Girling AJ, Freeman G, Gordon JP, Poole-Wilson P, Scott DA, Lilford RJ. Modeling payback from research into the efficacy of left-ventricular assist devices as destination therapy. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007;23(2):269–77.

    Article  PubMed  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Quinn RR, Naimark DMJ, Oliver MJ, Bayoumi AM. Should hemodialysis patients with atrial fibrillation undergo systemic anticoagulation? A cost-utility analysis. Am J Kidney Dis. 2007;50(3):421–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Teerawattananon Y, Mugford M, Tangcharoensathien V. Economic evaluation of palliative management versus peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis for end-stage renal disease: evidence for coverage decisions in Thailand. Value Health. 2007;10(1):61–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Galani C, Al M, Schneider H, Rutten FFH. Uncertainty in decision-making: value of additional information in the cost-effectiveness of lifestyle intervention in overweight and obese people. Value Health. 2008;11(3):424–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google 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.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Koerkamp BG, Nikken JJ, Oei EH, Stijnen T, Ginai AZ, Hunink MGM. Value of information analysis used to determine the necessity of additional research: MR imaging in acute knee trauma as an example. Radiology. 2008;246(2):420–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Oostenbrink JB, Al MJ, Oppe M, Rutten-van Mölken MP. Expected value of perfect information: an empirical example of reducing decision uncertainty by conducting additional research. Value Health. 2008;11(7):1070–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Singh S, Nosyk B, Sun H, Christenson JM, Innes G, Anis AH. Value of information of a clinical prediction rule: informing the efficient use of healthcare and health research resources. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24(1):112–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Somerville M, Garside R, Pitt M, Stein K. Surveillance of Barrett’s oesophagus: is it worthwhile? Eur J Cancer. 2008;44(4):588–99.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Ramsey SD, Blough DK, Sullivan SD. A forensic evaluation of the national emphysema treatment trial using the expected value of information approach. Med Care. 2008;46(5):542–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Wailoo AJ, Sutton AJ, Cooper NJ, Turner DA, Abrams KR, Brennan A, et al. Cost-effectiveness and value of information analyses of neuraminidase inhibitors for the treatment of influenza. Value Health. 2008;11(2):160–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Bansback N, Ara R, Ward S, Anis A, Choi HK. Statin therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: a cost-effectiveness and value-of-information analysis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27(1):25–37.

    Article  PubMed  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.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Carlson JJ, Garrison LP, Ramsey SD, Veenstra DL. The potential clinical and economic outcomes of pharmacogenomic approaches to EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy in non-small-cell lung cancer. Value Health. 2009;12(1):20–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Ehlers L, Overvad K, Sørensen J, Christensen S, Bech M, Kjølby M. Analysis of cost effectiveness of screening Danish men aged 65 for abdominal aortic aneurysm. BMJ. 2009;338:b2243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Hassan C, Hunink MG, Laghi A, Pickhardt PJ, Zullo A, Kim DH, et al. Value-of-information analysis to guide future research in colorectal cancer screening. Radiology. 2009;253(3):745–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Laghi A, Zullo A, Kim DH, Iafrate F, et al. Impact of whole-body CT screening on the cost effectiveness of CT colonography. Radiology. 2009;251(1):156–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google 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 

  109. Miners A. Revisiting the cost-effectiveness of primary prophylaxis with clotting factor for the treatment of severe haemophilia A. Haemophilia. 2009;15(4):881–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Wilson E, Gurusamy K, Gluud C, Davidson BR. Cost-utility and value-of-information analysis of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg. 2010;97(2):210–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google 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.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Grutters JP, Pijls-Johannesma M, Ruysscher DD, et al. The cost-effectiveness of particle therapy in non-small cell lung cancer: exploring decision uncertainty and areas for future research. Cancer Treat Rev. 2010;36(6):468–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Smits M, Dippel DW, Nederkoorn PJ, et al. Minor head injury: CT-based strategies for management—a cost-effectiveness analysis. Radiology. 2010;254(2):532–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Di Giulio E, Hunink MG, Zullo A, Nardelli BB. Value-of-information analysis to guide future research in the management of the colorectal malignant polyp. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010;53(2):135–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Kim N, Yang B, Lee T, Kwon S. An economic analysis of usual care and acupuncture collaborative treatment on chronic low back pain: a Markov model decision analysis. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2010;10:74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  118. McKenna C, Burch J, Suekarran S, et al. A systematic review and economic evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of aldosterone antagonists for postmyocardial infarction heart failure. Health Technol Assess. 2010;14(24):1–162.

    PubMed  CAS  Google 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.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  120. Stevenson MD, Scope A, Sutcliffe PA. The cost-effectiveness of group cognitive behavioural therapy compared with routine primary care for women with postnatal depression in the UK. Value Health. 2010;13(5):580–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Brush J, Boyd K, Chappell F, et al. The value of FDG positron emission tomography/computerised tomography (PET/CT) in pre-operative staging of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2011;15(35):1–192, iii-iv.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  122. Hall PS, Hulme C, McCabe C, Oluboyede Y, Round J, Cameron DA. Updated cost-effectiveness analysis of trastuzumab for early breast cancer: a UK perspective considering duration of benefit, long-term toxicity and pattern of recurrence. Pharmacoeconomics. 2011;29(5):415–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Latimer N, Lord J, Grant RL, O’Mahony R, Dickson J, Conaghan PG. Value of information in the osteoarthritis setting: cost effectiveness of COX-2 selective inhibitors, traditional NSAIDs and proton pump inhibitors. Pharmacoeconomics. 2011;29(3):225–37.

    Article  PubMed  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Soeteman DI, Busschbach JJ, Verheul R, Hoomans T, Kim JJ. Cost-effective psychotherapy for personality disorders in The Netherlands: the value of further research and active implementation. Value Health. 2011;14(2):229–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Gurusamy K, Wilson E, Burroughs AK, Davidson BR. Intra-operative vs pre-operative endoscopic sphincterotomy in patients with gallbladder and common bile duct stones: cost-utility and value-of-information analysis. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2012;10(1):15–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Maheswaran H, Barton P. Intensive case finding and isoniazid preventative therapy in HIV infected individuals in Africa: economic model and value of information analysis. PLoS One. 2012;7(1):e30457.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  129. Jackson CH, Bojke L, Thompson SG, Claxton K, Sharples LD. A framework for addressing structural uncertainty in decision models. Med Decis Making. 2011;31(4):662–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Jackson CH, Sharples LD, Thompson SG. Structural and parameter uncertainty in Bayesian cost-effectiveness models. J Roy Stat Soc C App. 2010;59(2):233–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  131. Bojke L, Claxton K, Sculpher M, Palmer S. Characterizing structural uncertainty in decision analytic models: a review and application of methods. Value Health. 2009;12(5):739–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Palmer S, Smith PC. Incorporating option values into the economic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ. 2000;19(5):755–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  133. Bilcke J, Beutels P, Brisson M, Jit M. Accounting for methodological, structural, and parameter uncertainty in decision-analytic models; a practical guide. Med Decis Making. 2011;31(4):675–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google 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 

  136. Husereau D. Sentence first, verdict afterwards: using value of information analysis to inform decisions about pharmacogenomic test adoption and research. Curr Pharmacogenom Personalized Med. 2010;8:167–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  137. Longworth L, Sculpher M, Bojke L, Tosh J. Bridging the gap between methods research and the needs of policy makers: a review of the research priorities of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011;27(2):180–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. Welch HG, Mogielnicki J. Presumed benefit: lessons from the American experience with marrow transplantation for breast cancer. BMJ. 2002;324(7345):1088–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

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.

Author contributions

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.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, PO Box 217, 7500 AE, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Lotte Steuten & Karin Groothuis-Oudshoorn

  2. Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Health Technology Assessment, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Gijs van de Wetering

  3. Department of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Valesca Retèl

Authors
  1. Lotte Steuten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gijs van de Wetering
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Karin Groothuis-Oudshoorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Valesca Retèl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lotte Steuten.

Appendix

Appendix

See Appendix Table 1

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Steuten, L., van de Wetering, G., Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K. et al. A Systematic and Critical Review of the Evolving Methods and Applications of Value of Information in Academia and Practice. PharmacoEconomics 31, 25–48 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-012-0008-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-012-0008-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation