GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: Medical Decision Making, SAGE Publications, Vol. 35, No. 7 ( 2015-10), p. 859-871
    Abstract: Decision makers in different health care settings need to weigh the benefits and harms of alternative treatment strategies. Such health care decisions include marketing authorization by regulatory agencies, practice guideline formulation by clinical groups, and treatment selection by prescribers and patients in clinical practice. Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a family of formal methods that help make explicit the tradeoffs that decision makers accept between the benefit and risk outcomes of different treatment options. Despite the recent interest in MCDA, certain methodological aspects are poorly understood. This paper presents 7 guidelines for applying MCDA in benefit-risk assessment and illustrates their use in the selection of a statin drug for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. We provide guidance on the key methodological issues of how to define the decision problem, how to select a set of nonoverlapping evaluation criteria, how to synthesize and summarize the evidence, how to translate relative measures to absolute ones that permit comparisons between the criteria, how to define suitable scale ranges, how to elicit partial preference information from the decision makers, and how to incorporate uncertainty in the analysis. Our example on statins indicates that fluvastatin is likely to be the most preferred drug by our decision maker and that this result is insensitive to the amount of preference information incorporated in the analysis.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0272-989X , 1552-681X
    Language: English
    Publisher: SAGE Publications
    Publication Date: 2015
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2040405-0
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: MDM Policy & Practice, SAGE Publications, Vol. 3, No. 2 ( 2018-07), p. 238146831879621-
    Abstract: Background. Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) has been identified as a prospective methodology for assisting decision makers in evaluating the benefits of new medicines in health technology assessment (HTA); however, limited empirical evidence exists from real-world applications. Objective. To test in practice a recently developed MCDA methodological framework for HTA, the Advance Value Framework, in a proof-of-concept case study with decision makers. Methods. A multi-attribute value theory methodology was adopted applying the MACBETH questioning protocol through a facilitated decision-analysis modelling approach as part of a decision conference with four experts. Settings. The remit of the Swedish Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency (Tandvårds- och läkemedelsförmånsverket [TLV]) was adopted but in addition supplementary value dimensions were considered. Patients. Metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer patients were considered having received prior chemotherapy. Interventions. Abiraterone, cabazitaxel, and enzalutamide were evaluated as third-line treatments. Measurements. Participants’ value preferences were elicited involving criteria selection, options scoring, criteria weighting, and their aggregation. Results. Eight criteria attributes were finally included in the model relating to therapeutic impact, safety profile, socioeconomic impact, and innovation level with relative importance weights 44.5%, 33.3%, 14.8%, and 7.4% per cluster, respectively. Enzalutamide scored the highest overall weighted preference value score, followed by abiraterone and cabazitaxel. Dividing treatments’ overall weighted preference value scores by their costs derived “costs per unit of value” for ranking the treatments based on value-for-money grounds. Limitations. Study limitations included lack of comparative clinical effects across treatments and the small sample of participants. Conclusion. The Advance Value Framework has the prospects of facilitating the evaluation process in HTA and health care decision making; additional research is recommended to address technical challenges and optimize the use of MCDA for policy making.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2381-4683 , 2381-4683
    Language: English
    Publisher: SAGE Publications
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2861432-X
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, SAGE Publications
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0141-0768 , 1758-1095
    Language: English
    Publisher: SAGE Publications
    Publication Date: 2023
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2046643-2
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: Medical Decision Making, SAGE Publications, Vol. 40, No. 6 ( 2020-08), p. 830-845
    Abstract: Background. The assessment of value along the clinical development of new biopharmaceutical compounds is a challenging task. Complex and uncertain evidence has to be analyzed, considering a multitude of value preferences from different stakeholders. Objective. To investigate the use of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to support decision making during drug development while considering payer and health technology assessment (HTA) value concerns, by applying the Advance Value Framework in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and testing for the consistency of the results. Design. A multiattribute value theory methodology was applied and 2 rounds of decision conferences (DCs) were organized in 3 countries (England, France, and Germany), with the participation of national key experts and stakeholders using the MACBETH questioning protocol and algorithm. A total of 51 health care professionals, patient advocates, and methodologists, including (ex-) committee members or assessors from national HTA bodies, participated in 6 DCs in the study countries. Target Population. NASH patients in fibrosis stages F2 to 3 were considered. Interventions. The value of a hypothetical product profile was assessed against 3 compounds under development using their phase 2 results. Outcome Measures. DC participants’ value preferences were elicited involving criteria selection, options scoring, and criteria weighting. Results. Highly consistent valuation rankings were observed in all DCs, always favoring the same compound. Highly consistent rankings of criteria clusters were observed, favoring therapeutic benefit criteria, followed by safety profile and innovation level criteria. Limitations. There was a lack of comparative treatment effects, early evidence on surrogate endpoints was used, and stakeholder representativeness was limited in some DCs. Conclusions. The use of MCDA is promising in supporting early HTA, illustrating high consistency in results across countries and between study rounds.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0272-989X , 1552-681X
    Language: English
    Publisher: SAGE Publications
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2040405-0
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...