Dataset Information

Value of Information: Sensitivity Analysis and Research Design in Bayesian Evidence Synthesis.

ABSTRACT: Suppose we have a Bayesian model that combines evidence from several different sources. We want to know which model parameters most affect the estimate or decision from the model, or which of the parameter uncertainties drive the decision uncertainty. Furthermore, we want to prioritize what further data should be collected. These questions can be addressed by Value of Information (VoI) analysis, in which we estimate expected reductions in loss from learning specific parameters or collecting data of a given design. We describe the theory and practice of VoI for Bayesian evidence synthesis, using and extending ideas from health economics, computer modeling and Bayesian design. The methods are general to a range of decision problems including point estimation and choices between discrete actions. We apply them to a model for estimating prevalence of HIV infection, combining indirect information from surveys, registers, and expert beliefs. This analysis shows which parameters contribute most of the uncertainty about each prevalence estimate, and the expected improvements in precision from specific amounts of additional data. These benefits can be traded with the costs of sampling to determine an optimal sample size. Supplementary materials for this article, including a standardized description of the materials available for reproducing the work, are available as an online supplement.

SUBMITTER: Jackson C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7034331 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Value of Information: Sensitivity Analysis and Research Design in Bayesian Evidence Synthesis.

Jackson Christopher C Presanis Anne A Conti Stefano S De Angelis Daniela D

Journal of the American Statistical Association 20190430 528

Suppose we have a Bayesian model that combines evidence from several different sources. We want to know which model parameters most affect the estimate or decision from the model, or which of the parameter uncertainties drive the decision uncertainty. Furthermore, we want to prioritize what further data should be collected. These questions can be addressed by Value of Information (VoI) analysis, in which we estimate expected reductions in loss from learning specific parameters or collecting data ...[more]

PMID: 32165869

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The grades of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach is widely implemented in systematic reviews, health technology assessment and guideline development organisations throughout the world. A key advantage to this approach is that it aids transparency regarding judgments on the quality of evidence. However, the intricacies of making judgments about research methodology and evidence make the GRADE system complex and challenging to apply without training. METHODS:We have developed a semi-automated quality assessment tool (SAQAT) l based on GRADE. This is informed by responses by reviewers to checklist questions regarding characteristics that may lead to unreliability. These responses are then entered into the Bayesian network to ascertain the probabilities of risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision and publication bias conditional on review characteristics. The model then combines these probabilities to provide a probability for each of the GRADE overall quality categories. We tested the model using a range of plausible scenarios that guideline developers or review authors could encounter. RESULTS:Overall, the model reproduced GRADE judgements for a range of scenarios. Potential advantages over standard assessment are use of explicit and consistent weightings for different review characteristics, forcing consideration of important but sometimes neglected characteristics and principled downgrading where small but important probabilities of downgrading are accrued across domains. CONCLUSIONS:Bayesian networks have considerable potential for use as tools to assess the validity of research evidence. The key strength of such networks lies in the provision of a statistically coherent method for combining probabilities across a complex framework based on both belief and evidence. In addition to providing tools for less experienced users to implement reliability assessment, the potential for sensitivity analyses and automation may be beneficial for application and the methodological development of reliability tools.

Project description:Background: Value of information (VOI) analysis quantifies the value of additional research in reducing decision uncertainty. It addresses adoption and research decisions simultaneously by comparing the expected benefits and costs of research studies. Nevertheless, the application of this approach in practice remains limited. Objectives: To apply VOI analysis in health care interventions to guide adoption decisions, optimize trial design, and prioritize research. Methods: The analysis was from the perspective of Queensland Health, Australia. It included four interventions: clinically indicated catheter replacement, tissue adhesive for securing catheters, negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in caesarean sections, and nutritional support for preventing pressure ulcers. For each intervention, cost-effectiveness analysis was performed, decision uncertainty characterized, and VOI calculated using Monte Carlo simulations. The benefits and costs of additional research were considered together with the costs and consequences of acting now versus waiting for more information. All values are reported in 2014 Australian dollars (AU$). Results: All interventions were cost-effective, but with various levels of decision uncertainty. The current evidence is sufficient to support the adoption of clinically indicated catheter replacement. For the tissue adhesive, an additional study before adoption is worthwhile with a four-arm trial of 220 patients per arm. Additional research on NPWT before adoption is worthwhile with a two-arm trial of 200 patients per arm. Nutritional support should be adopted with a two-arm trial of 1200 patients per arm. Based on the expected net monetary benefits, the studies were ranked as follows: 1) NPWT (AU$1.2 million), 2) tissue adhesive (AU$0.3 milliion), and 3) nutritional support (AU$0.1 million). Conclusions: VOI analysis is a useful and practical approach to inform adoption and research decisions. Efforts should be focused on facilitating its integration into decision making frameworks.

Dataset Information

Value of Information: Sensitivity Analysis and Research Design in Bayesian Evidence Synthesis.

Publications

Value of Information: Sensitivity Analysis and Research Design in Bayesian Evidence Synthesis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets