Alternative Conversion Methods for Transition Probabilities in State-Transition Models: Validity and Impact on Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness.

Med Decis Making

Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall i.T., Austria.

Published: July 2019

AI Article Synopsis

  • State-transition models (STMs) help conceptualize health decision problems by mapping out health states and transitions over time, but the commonly used method (C) for adjusting cycle lengths can be inaccurate, especially with multiple health states.
  • In the study, two alternative matrix transformation methods, Eigenvalue method (E) and Schure-Padé method (SP), were compared against method C using a breast cancer treatment STM, assessing factors like life years, costs, and effectiveness.
  • Results showed that while there is no one-size-fits-all solution, SP generally provided the smallest errors, particularly in two treatment strategies, while E performed better in larger models, suggesting that using alternative methods should be considered in sensitivity analyses.

Article Abstract

. In state-transition models (STMs), decision problems are conceptualized using health states and transitions among those health states after predefined time cycles. The naive, commonly applied method (C) for cycle length conversion transforms all transition probabilities separately. In STMs with more than 2 health states, this method is not accurate. Therefore, we aim to describe and compare the performance of method C with that of alternative matrix transformation methods. . We compare 2 alternative matrix transformation methods (Eigenvalue method [E], Schure-Padé method [SP]) to method C applied in an STM of 3 different treatment strategies for women with breast cancer. We convert the given annual transition matrix into a monthly-cycle matrix and evaluate induced transformation errors for the transition matrices and the long-term outcomes: life years, quality-adjusted life-years, costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, and the performance related to the decisions. In addition, we applied these transformation methods to randomly generated annual transition matrices with 4, 7, 10, and 20 health states. . In theory, there is no generally applicable correct transformation method. Based on our simulations, SP resulted in the smallest transformation-induced discrepancies for generated annual transition matrices for 2 treatment strategies. E showed slightly smaller discrepancies than SP in the strategy, where one of the direct transitions between health states was excluded. For long-term outcomes, the largest discrepancy occurred for estimated costs applying method C. For higher dimensional models, E performs best. . In our modeling examples, matrix transformations (E, SP) perform better than transforming all transition probabilities separately (C). Transition probabilities based on alternative conversion methods should therefore be applied in sensitivity analyses.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X19851095DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

health states
20
transition probabilities
16
transformation methods
12
annual transition
12
transition matrices
12
alternative conversion
8
conversion methods
8
transition
8
state-transition models
8
transitions health
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!