Value of information analysis used to determine the necessity of additional research: MR imaging in acute knee trauma as an example

Radiology

Volumn 246, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 420-425

  Koerkamp, Bas Groot ^a,d   Nikken, Jeroen J ^a   Oei, Edwin H ^a   Stijnen, Theo ^b   Ginai, Abida Z ^a   Hunink, M G Myriam ^a,c  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^d ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE COST; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW; KNEE INJURY; KNEE RADIOGRAPHY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PARENTAL CONSENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; ADOLESCENT; AGED; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST CONTROL; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ECONOMICS; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STATISTICS; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CHILD; COST SAVINGS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; KNEE INJURIES; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); QUALITY OF LIFE;

EID: 39549118142     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2462070093     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Nikken JJ, Oei EH, Ginai AZ, et al. Acute peripheral joint injury: cost and effectiveness of low-field-strength MR imaging - results of randomized controlled trial. Radiology 2005;236:958-967.
2. Phillips CV. The economics of "more research is needed". Int J Epidemiol 2001;30:771-776.
3. Claxton K, Sculpher M, Drummond M. A rational framework for decision making by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Lancet 2002;360:711-715.
4. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997;35:1095-1108.
5. Hunink MGM, Glasziou P. Decision making in health and medicine. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
6. Van Rijen, AJG. Zinnige en duurzame zorg. Zoetermeer, the Netherlands: Raad voor de Volksgezondheid en Zorg, 2006.
7. Stinnett AA, Mullahy J. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1998;18(2 suppl):S68-S80.
8. Ades AE, Lu G, Claxton K. Expected value of sample information calculations in medical decision modeling. Med Decis Making 2004;24:207-227.
9. Claxton K. The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ 1999;18:341-364.
10. Brennan A, Chilcott J, Kharroubi S, O'Hagan A. A two level Monte Carlo approach to calculating expected value of perfect information: resolution of the uncertainty in methods [abstr]. Med Decis Making 2002;22(suppl):552.
11. Felli JC, Hazen GB. Sensitivity analysis and the expected value of perfect information. Med Decis Making 1998;18:95-109.
12. Groot Koerkamp B, Myriam Hunink MG, Stijnen T, Weinstein MC. Identifying key parameters in cost-effectiveness analysis using value of information: a comparison of methods. Health Econ 2006;15:383-392.
13. Anderson TW. An introduction to multivariate statistical analysis. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience, 1984.
14. Gelman A, Carlin JG, Stern HS, Rubin DB. Bayesian data analysis. London, England: Chapman & Hall, 1995.
15. Claxton K, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, Philips Z, Palmer S. A pilot study on the use of decision theory and value of information analysis as part of the NHS Health Technology Assessment programme. Health Technol Assess 2004;8(31):1-103, iii.
16. Claxton K, Eggington S, Ginnelly L, et al. A pilot study of value of information analysis to support research recommendations for NICE. York, England: Centre for Health Economics, 2005.