Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modelling Technique, Structural Assumptions, Input Parameter Values: Which Has the Most Impact on the Results of a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis?

  • Commentary
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

References

  1. Karnon J, Haji Ali Afzali H. When to use discrete event simulation (DES) for the economic evaluation of health technologies? A review and critique of the costs and benefits of DES. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;. doi:10.1007/s40273-014-0147-9.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Caro JJ, Moller J, Getsios D. Discrete event simulation: the preferred technique for health economic evaluations? Value Health. 2010;13:1056–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Heeg B, Buskens E, Knapp M, et al. Modelling the treated course of schizophrenia: development of a discrete event simulation model. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(Suppl 1):17–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mauskopf J. A methodological review of models used to estimate the cost effectiveness of antiretroviral regimens for the treatment of HIV infection. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31:1031–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. von Scheele B, Mauskopf J, Brodtkorb TH, Ainsworth C, Berargo CG, Patel A. Relationship between modeling technique and reported outcomes: case studies in models for the treatment of schizophrenia. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014;14:235–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Simpson KN, Rajagopalan R, Dietz B. Cost-effectiveness analysis of lopinavir/ritonavir and atazanavir + ritonavir regimens in the CASTLE study. Adv Ther. 2009;26(2):185–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Simpson KN, Baran RW, Collomb D, Beck EJ, Van de Steen O, Dietz B. Economic and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) comparison of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) and atazanavir plus ritonavir (ATV + RTV) based regimens for antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive and -experienced United Kingdom patients in 2011. J Med Econ. 2012;15(4):796–806.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Thuresson PO, Heeg B, Lescrauwaet B, Sennfält K, Alaeus A, Neubauer A. Cost-effectiveness of atazanavir/ritonavir compared with lopinavir/ritonavir in treatment-naive human immunodeficiency virus-1 patients in Sweden. Scand J Infect Dis. 2011;43(4):304–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013; 2013. http://www.nice.org.uk/media/D45/1E/GuideToMethodsTechnologyAppraisal2013.pdf. Accessed 17 Mar 2014.

  10. Laux G, Heeg B, van Hout BA, Mehnert A. Costs and effects of long-acting risperidone compared with oral atypical and conventional depot formulations in Germany. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(Suppl 1):49–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Furiak NM, Ascher-Svanum H, Klein RW, et al. Cost-effectiveness of olanzapine long-acting injection in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia in the United States: a micro-simulation economic decision model. Curr Med Res Opin. 2011;27:713–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lieberman JA, Stroup TS, McEvoy JP, Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) Investigators, et al. Effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs in patients with chronic schizophrenia. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(12):1209–23 Erratum in: N Engl J Med. 2010;363(11):1092–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of Interest/Funding

Dr. Mauskopf works for a company that develops cost-effectiveness models for new health care interventions, using different modelling techniques including decision trees, Markov models, and Monte Carlo and discrete event simulation models. No external funding was received for this commentary.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. RTI Health Solutions, 3040 Cornwallis Road, Post Office Box 12194, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, USA

    Josephine Mauskopf

Authors
  1. Josephine Mauskopf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Josephine Mauskopf.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mauskopf, J. Modelling Technique, Structural Assumptions, Input Parameter Values: Which Has the Most Impact on the Results of a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis?. PharmacoEconomics 32, 521–523 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-014-0157-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-014-0157-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation