Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38583100›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2024

Value of Information for Clinical Trial Design: The Importance of Considering All Relevant Comparators.

Anna Heath, Gianluca Baio, Ioanna Manolopoulou, Nicky J Welton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A Pragmatic Bayesian Adaptive Trial Design Based on the Value of Information: The Value-Driven Adaptive Design.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
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

4 authors.

Anna HeathChild Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada. anna.heath@sickkids.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-7263-4251
Gianluca BaioDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4314-2570
Ioanna ManolopoulouDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5379-2916
Nicky J WeltonBristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2198-3205

Funding

Canada Research Chairs Statistical Trial DesignMedical Research Council G0802413Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada RGPIN-2021-03366
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Value of Information (VOI) analyses calculate the economic value that could be generated by obtaining further information to reduce uncertainty in a health economic decision model. VOI has been suggested as a tool for research prioritisation and trial design as it can highlight economically valuable avenues for future research. Recent methodological advances have made it increasingly feasible to use VOI in practice for research; however, there are critical differences between the VOI approach and the standard methods used to design research studies such as clinical trials. We aimed to highlight key differences between the research design approach based on VOI and standard clinical trial design methods, in particular the importance of considering the full decision context. We present two hypothetical examples to demonstrate that VOI methods are only accurate when (1) all feasible comparators are included in the decision model when designing research, and (2) all comparators are retained in the decision model once the data have been collected and a final treatment recommendation is made. Omitting comparators from either the design or analysis phase of research when using VOI methods can lead to incorrect trial designs and/or treatment recommendations. Overall, we conclude that incorrectly specifying the health economic model by ignoring potential comparators can lead to misleading VOI results and potentially waste scarce research resources.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicDecision Support TechniquesModels, EconomicResearch DesignCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision MakingHumansUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID38583100
PMCPMC11039417

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.