Reviews

Comparing Health Economic Models to Answer Public Health Problems: A Review

Abstract

Nowadays, decision analysis models are extensively used in solving healthcare problems. Considering the limited resources, the results of these studies will greatly assist policymakers with resource allocation. The purpose of this study is to provide a review of different decision analysis models in healthcare systems and to compare the components used in developing these models in studies addressing cervical cancer prevention. In this comprehensive review on decision analysis models used for cervical cancer prevention, we determined that the major components of the models included costs, outcomes, cycle lengths, discount rate, and perspective. The most commonly used model found in our review was the Markov model; nevertheless, it appears that dynamic models are gaining popularity over recent years. Conclusion: Using decision analysis models and encouraging healthcare policymakers to apply the results of modeling studies will result in saving time and costs, and will facilitate decision making in healthcare issues.

(CSMG) CSMG. Modelling in Healthcare2009.

Chelimo C, Wouldes TA, Cameron LD, Elwood JM. Risk factors for and prevention of human papillomaviruses (HPV), genital warts and cervical cancer. Journal of Infection. 2013;66(3):207-17.

Brailsford S, Hilton N. A comparison of discrete event simulation and system dynamics for modelling health care systems. 2001.

Goldie SJ, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Garnett GP. Public health policy for cervical cancer prevention: The role of decision science, economic evaluation, and mathematical modeling. Vaccine. 2006;24:S155-S63.

Weinstein MC, Toy EL, Sandberg EA, Neumann PJ, Evans JS, Kuntz KM, et al. Modeling for health care and other policy decisions: uses, roles, and validity. Value in Health. 2001;4(5):348-61.

Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, et al. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer. 2013(No. 11).

Schiffman M, Castle PE. The promise of global cervical-cancer prevention. New England Journal of Medicine. 2005;353(20):2101-4.

Chang A. The cervical smear test in the next millennium. HKMJ. 1999;5:294-302.

Peto J, Gilham C, Fletcher O, Matthews FE. The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK. The Lancet. 2004;364(9430):249-56.

Altekruse S, Kosary C, Krapcho M, Neyman N, Aminou R, Waldron W, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2007, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda (MD)(based on November 2009 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, 2010). seer cancer gov/csr. 2012.

Munoz N. Human papillomavirus and cancer: the epidemiological evidence. Journal of clinical virology. 2000;19(1):1-5.

Schiffman M, Wentzensen N, Wacholder S, Kinney W, Gage JC, Castle PE. Human papillomavirus testing in the prevention of cervical cancer. Journal of the National cancer institute. 2011;103(5):368-83.

Parsonnet J, Harris RA, Hack HM, Owens DK. Modelling cost-effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori screening to prevent gastric cancer: a mandate for clinical trials. The Lancet. 1996;348(9021):150-4.

Frazier AL, Colditz GA, Fuchs CS, Kuntz KM. Cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer in the general population. Jama. 2000;284(15):1954-61.

Mahadevia PJ, Fleisher LA, Frick KD, Eng J, Goodman SN, Powe NR. Lung cancer screening with helical computed tomography in older adult smokers: a decision and cost-effectiveness analysis. Jama. 2003;289(3):313-22.

Hillner BE, Smith TJ. Efficacy and cost effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy in women with node-negative breast cancer: a decision-analysis model. New England Journal of Medicine. 1991;324(3):160-8.

Chahoud J, Rieber AG, Semaan A. Wealth, health expenditure, and cancer: A national perspective. American Society of Clinical Oncology; 2015.

Briggs AH, Claxton K, Sculpher MJ. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation: Handbooks in Health Economic E; 2006.

Petrou S, Gray A. Economic evaluation alongside randomised controlled trials: design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. Bmj. 2011;342:d1548.

Sonnenberg FA, Beck JR. Markov models in medical decision making a practical guide. Medical Decision Making. 1993;13(4):322-38.

Briggs AD, Wolstenholme J, Blakely T, Scarborough P. Choosing an epidemiological model structure for the economic evaluation of non-communicable disease public health interventions. Population health metrics. 2016;14(1):17.

Kreke JE, Schaefer AJ, Roberts MS. Simulation and critical care modeling. Current opinion in critical care. 2004;10(5):395-8.

Sun X, Faunce T. Decision-analytical modelling in health-care economic evaluations. The European Journal of Health Economics. 2008;9(4):313-23.

Leong TY. Multiple perspective dynamic decision making. Artificial Intelligence. 1998;105(1):209-61.

Harrison RL, editor Introduction to Monte Carlo simulation. AIP conference proceedings; 2010: NIH Public Access.

Karnon J. Alternative decision modelling techniques for the evaluation of health care technologies: Markov processes versus discrete event simulation. Health economics. 2003;12(10):837-48.

Standfield L, Comans T, Scuffham P. MARKOV MODELING AND DISCRETE EVENT SIMULATION IN HEALTH CARE: A SYSTEMATIC COMPARISON.

Walter E, Zehetmayr S. Guidelines on health economic evaluation–Consensus paper. Inst Pharmaeconomic Res. 2006.

Uyl-de Groot CA. Economic evaluation of cancer therapies: more and better studies will lead to better choices in cancer care. European Journal of Cancer. 2006;42(17):2862-6.

Detsky AS, Naglie IG. A clinician's guide to cost-effectiveness analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1990;113(2):147-54.

Sculpher M, Fenwick E, Claxton K. Assessing quality in decision analytic cost-effectiveness models. Pharmacoeconomics. 2000;17(5):461-77.

Kim S-Y, Goldie SJ, Salomon JA. Cost-effectiveness of Rotavirus vaccination in Vietnam. BMC Public Health. 2009;9(1):29.

Cantor SB, Fahs MC, Mandelblatt JS, Myers ER, Sanders GD. Decision science and cervical cancer. Cancer. 2003;98(S9).

Tappenden P, Chilcott J, Ward S, Eggington S, Hind D, Hummel S. Methodological issues in the economic analysis of cancer treatments. European journal of cancer. 2006;42(17):2867-75.

Slothuus U. An Evaluation of Selected Literature on the Measurement of Costs in Health Economic Evaluations. 2000.

Pannell DJ. Sensitivity analysis of normative economic models: theoretical framework and practical strategies. Agricultural economics. 1997;16(2):139-52.

Pannell DJ. Sensitivity analysis: strategies, methods, concepts, examples. Agric Econ. 1997;16:139-52.

Van Ballegooijen M, Van Den Akker-Van Marle M, Warmerdam P, Meijer C, Walboomers J, Habbema J. Present evidence on the value of HPV testing for cervical cancer screening: a model-based exploration of the (cost-) effectiveness. British journal of cancer. 1997;76(5):651.

Brown AD, Garber AM. Cost-effectiveness of 3 methods to enhance the sensitivity of Papanicolaou testing. JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association. 1999;281(4):347-53.

Goldie SJ, Kuhn L, Denny L, Pollack A, Wright TC. Policy analysis of cervical cancer screening strategies in low-resource settings. JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association. 2001;285(24):3107-15.

Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Gaffikin L, Limpahayom KK, Lumbiganon P, Warakamin S, et al. Costs and benefits of different strategies to screen for cervical cancer in less-developed countries. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2002;94(19):1469-83.

van den Akker-van ME, van Ballegooijen M, van Oortmarssen GJ, Boer R, Habbema JDF. Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening: comparison of screening policies. Journal of the National cancer institute. 2002;94(3):193-204.

Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Womack SM, Jacobson D, Yi B, Hwang Y, et al. Benefits and costs of using HPV testing to screen for cervical cancer. JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association. 2002;287(18):2372-81.

Maxwell GL, Carlson JW, Ochoa M, Krivak T, Rose GS, Myers ER. Costs and effectiveness of alternative strategies for cervical cancer screening in military beneficiaries. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2002;100(4):740-8.

Goldie SJ, Kim JJ, Wright TC. Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in women aged 30 years or more. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2004;103(4):619-31.

Canfell K, Barnabas R, Patnick J, Beral V. The predicted effect of changes in cervical screening practice in the UK: results from a modelling study. British Journal of Cancer. 2004;91(3):530-6.

Goldie SJ, Gaffikin L, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Gordillo-Tobar A, Levin C, Mahé C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cervical-cancer screening in five developing countries. New England Journal of Medicine. 2005;353(20):2158-68.

Kim JJ, Wright TC, Goldie SJ. Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus DNA testing in the United Kingdom, The Netherlands, France, and Italy. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2005;97(12):888-95.

Berkhof J, Coupé VM, Bogaards JA, van Kemenade FJ, Helmerhorst TJ, Snijders PJ, et al. The health and economic effects of HPV DNA screening in The Netherlands. International Journal of Cancer. 2010;127(9):2147-58.

Bidus MA, Maxwell GL, Kulasingam S, Rose GS, Elkas JC, Chernofsky M, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2006;107(5):997-1005.

Koong S-L, Yen AM-F, Chen TH-H. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of nationwide cervical cancer screening in Taiwan. Journal of medical screening. 2006;13(suppl 1):44-7.

Siebert U, Sroczynski G, Hillemanns P, Engel J, Stabenow R, Stegmaier C, et al. The German cervical cancer screening model: development and validation of a decision-analytic model for cervical cancer screening in Germany. The European Journal of Public Health. 2006;16(2):185-92.

Kim JJ, Kuntz KM, Stout NK, Mahmud S, Villa LL, Franco EL, et al. Multiparameter calibration of a natural history model of cervical cancer. American journal of epidemiology. 2007;166(2):137-50.

Kohli M, Ferko N, Martin A, Franco E, Jenkins D, Gallivan S, et al. Estimating the long-term impact of a prophylactic human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine on the burden of cervical cancer in the UK. British journal of cancer. 2007;96(1):143-50.

Bistoletti P, Sennfält K, Dillner J. Cost‐effectiveness of primary cytology and HPV DNA cervical screening. International Journal of Cancer. 2008;122(2):372-6.

Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Stout NK, Salomon JA, Kuntz KM, Goldie SJ. Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with human papillomavirus DNA testing and HPV-16, 18 vaccination. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2008;100(5):308-20.

Anderson R, Haas M, Shanahan M. The cost‐effectiveness of cervical screening in Australia: what is the impact of screening at different intervals or over a different age range? Australian and New Zealand journal of public health. 2008;32(1):43-52.

Andrés-Gamboa O, Chicaíza L, García-Molina M, Díaz J, González M, Murillo R, et al. Cost-effectiveness of conventional cytology and HPV DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in Colombia. salud pública de méxico. 2008;50(4):276-85.

Vijayaraghavan A, Efrusy M, Lindeque G, Dreyer G, Santas C. Cost effectiveness of high-risk HPV DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in South Africa. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;112(2):377-83.

Goldie SJ, Diaz M, Constenla D, Alvis N, Andrus JK, Kim S-Y. Mathematical models of cervical cancer prevention in Latin America and the Caribbean. Vaccine. 2008;26:L59-L72.

Kulasingam S, Rajan R, Yvan St Pierre C, Myers E, Franco E. Human papillomavirus testing with Pap triage for cervical cancer prevention in Canada: a cost-effectiveness analysis. BMC medicine. 2009;7(1):69.

Levin CE, Sellors J, Shi JF, Ma L, Qiao Y, Ortendahl J, et al. Cost‐effectiveness analysis of cervical cancer prevention based on a rapid human papillomavirus screening test in a high‐risk region of China. International Journal of Cancer. 2010;127(6):1404-11.

Sroczynski G, Schnell-Inderst P, Mühlberger N, Lang K, Aidelsburger P, Wasem J, et al. Decision-analytic modeling to evaluate the long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HPV-DNA testing in primary cervical cancer screening in Germany. GMS health technology assessment. 2010;6.

Creighton P, Lew J-B, Clements M, Smith M, Howard K, Dyer S, et al. Cervical cancer screening in Australia: modelled evaluation of the impact of changing the recommended interval from two to three years. BMC public health. 2010;10(1):734.

Chuck A. Cost‐Effectiveness of 21 Alternative Cervical Cancer Screening Strategies. Value in Health. 2010;13(2):169-79.

Obradovic M, Mrhar A, Kos M. Cost-effectiveness analysis of HPV vaccination alongside cervical cancer screening programme in Slovenia. The European Journal of Public Health. 2010;20(4):415-21.

Chow IH, Tang C, You S, Liao C, Chu T, Chen C, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of human papillomavirus DNA testing and Pap smear for cervical cancer screening in a publicly financed health-care system. British journal of cancer. 2010;103(12):1773-82.

Vijayaraghavan A, Efrusy MB, Goodman KA, Santas CC, Huh WK. Cost-effectiveness of using human papillomavirus 16/18 genotype triage in cervical cancer screening. Gynecologic oncology. 2010;119(2):237-42.

Shi J-F, Canfell K, Lew J-B, Zhao F-H, Legood R, Ning Y, et al. Evaluation of primary HPV-DNA testing in relation to visual inspection methods for cervical cancer screening in rural China: an epidemiologic and cost-effectiveness modelling study. BMC Cancer. 2011;11(1):239.

Demarteau N, Detournay B, Tehard B, El Hasnaoui A, Standaert B. A generally applicable cost-effectiveness model for the evaluation of vaccines against cervical cancer. International journal of public health. 2011;56(2):153-62.

Yamamoto N, Mori R, Jacklin P, Osuga Y, Kawana K, Shibuya K, et al. Introducing HPV vaccine and scaling up screening procedures to prevent deaths from cervical cancer in Japan: a cost‐effectiveness analysis. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2012;119(2):177-86.

Burger E, Ortendahl J, Sy S, Kristiansen I, Kim J. Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with primary human papillomavirus testing in Norway. British journal of cancer. 2012.

de Kok IM, van Rosmalen J, Dillner J, Arbyn M, Sasieni P, Iftner T, et al. Primary screening for human papillomavirus compared with cytology screening for cervical cancer in European settings: cost effectiveness analysis based on a Dutch microsimulation model. Bmj. 2012;344.

Kulasingam SL, Havrilesky LJ, Ghebre R, Myers ER. Screening for cervical cancer: a modeling study for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Journal of lower genital tract disease. 2013;17(2):193.

Demarteau N, Morhason-Bello IO, Akinwunmi B, Adewole IF. Modeling optimal cervical cancer prevention strategies in Nigeria. BMC cancer. 2014;14(1):365.

Laprise J-F, Drolet M, Boily M-C, Jit M, Sauvageau C, Franco EL, et al. Comparing the cost-effectiveness of two-and three-dose schedules of human papillomavirus vaccination: a transmission-dynamic modelling study. Vaccine. 2014;32(44):5845-53.

Jit M, Brisson M, Portnoy A, Hutubessy R. Cost-effectiveness of female human papillomavirus vaccination in 179 countries: a PRIME modelling study. The Lancet Global health. 2014;2(7):e406-e14.

Jit M, Brisson M, Laprise J-F, Choi YH. Comparison of two dose and three dose human papillomavirus vaccine schedules: cost effectiveness analysis based on transmission model. Bmj. 2015;350:g7584.

Nahvijou A, Daroudi R, Tahmasebi M, Hashemi FA, Hemami MR, Sari AA, et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Different Cervical Screening Strategies in Islamic Republic of Iran: A Middle-Income Country with a Low Incidence Rate of Cervical Cancer. PloS one. 2016;11(6):e0156705.

Lew J-B, Simms KT, Smith MA, Hall M, Kang Y-J, Xu XM, et al. Primary HPV testing versus cytology-based cervical screening in women in Australia vaccinated for HPV and unvaccinated: effectiveness and economic assessment for the National Cervical Screening Program. The Lancet Public Health. 2017;2(2):e96-e107.

Majidi A, Ghiasvand R, Hadji M, Nahvijou A, Mousavi A-S, Pakgohar M, et al. Priority Setting for Improvement of Cervical Cancer Prevention in Iran. International Journal of Health Policy and Management. 2015.

Nahvijou A, Hadji M, BaratiMarnani A, Tourang F, NedaBayat E, Daroudi R, et al. A Systematic Review of Economic Aspects of Cervical Cancer Screening Strategies Worldwide: Discrepancy between Economic Analysis and Policymaking. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. 2014;15(19):8229-37.

Farnsworth A. Screening for the prevention of cervical cancer in the era of human papillomavirus vaccination: an Australian perspective. Acta Cytol. 2011;55(4):307-12.

Organization WH. Cervical cancer screening in developing countries: report of a WHO consultation: World Health Organization; 2002.

Files
IssueVol 9 No 1 (2017) QRcode
SectionReviews
Keywords
Health Economic Models Cervical Cancer Mathematical Models

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
1.
Jariri F, Hadji M, Nahvijou A. Comparing Health Economic Models to Answer Public Health Problems: A Review. Basic Clin Cancer Res. 2017;9(1):26-39.