Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34231446›Full record

ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2022

Multilevel and Quasi Monte Carlo Methods for the Calculation of the Expected Value of Partial Perfect Information.

Wei Fang, Zhenru Wang, Michael B Giles, Chris H Jackson, Nicky J Welton, Christophe Andrieu, Howard Thom

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Value of Information Analysis in Models to Inform Health Policy.Annual review of statistics and its application · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Wei FangMathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2423-1431
Zhenru WangMathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.
Michael B GilesMathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.
Chris H JacksonMRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK.
Nicky J WeltonPopulation Health Science, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Christophe AndrieuSchool of Mathematics, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6656-8913
Howard ThomPopulation Health Science, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8576-5552

Funding

Department of Health NF-SI-0611-10168Medical Research Council G0802413Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/11Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1Medical Research Council MR/S036709/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI) provides an upper bound on the value of collecting further evidence on a set of inputs to a cost-effectiveness decision model. Standard Monte Carlo estimation of EVPPI is computationally expensive as it requires nested simulation. Alternatives based on regression approximations to the model have been developed but are not practicable when the number of uncertain parameters of interest is large and when parameter estimates are highly correlated. The error associated with the regression approximation is difficult to determine, while MC allows the bias and precision to be controlled. In this article, we explore the potential of quasi Monte Carlo (QMC) and multilevel Monte Carlo (MLMC) estimation to reduce the computational cost of estimating EVPPI by reducing the variance compared with MC while preserving accuracy. We also develop methods to apply QMC and MLMC to EVPPI, addressing particular challenges that arise where Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) has been used to estimate input parameter distributions. We illustrate the methods using 2 examples: a simplified decision tree model for treatments for depression and a complex Markov model for treatments to prevent stroke in atrial fibrillation, both of which use MCMC inputs. We compare the performance of QMC and MLMC with MC and the approximation techniques of generalized additive model (GAM) regression, Gaussian process (GP) regression, and integrated nested Laplace approximations (INLA-GP). We found QMC and MLMC to offer substantial computational savings when parameter sets are large and correlated and when the EVPPI is large. We also found that GP and INLA-GP were biased in those situations, whereas GAM cannot estimate EVPPI for large parameter sets.

Indexed as

Monte Carlo MethodBayes TheoremComputer SimulationCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansMarkov ChainsUncertaintyexpected value of partial perfect informationmultilevel Monte Carlonested expectationsquasi Monte Carlo

Identifiers

PMID34231446
PMCPMC8777326

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.