IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v36y2016i5p652-665.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Calibrating Parameters for Microsimulation Disease Models

Author

Listed:
  • Alex van der Steen
  • Joost van Rosmalen
  • Sonja Kroep
  • Frank van Hees
  • Ewout W. Steyerberg
  • Harry J. de Koning
  • Marjolein van Ballegooijen
  • Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar

Abstract

Background. Calibration (estimation of model parameters) compares model outcomes with observed outcomes and explores possible model parameter values to identify the set of values that provides the best fit to the data. The goodness-of-fit (GOF) criterion quantifies the difference between model and observed outcomes. There is no consensus on the most appropriate GOF criterion, because a direct performance comparison of GOF criteria in model calibration is lacking. Methods. We systematically compared the performance of commonly used GOF criteria (sum of squared errors [SSE], Pearson chi-square, and a likelihood-based approach [Poisson and/or binomial deviance functions]) in the calibration of selected parameters of the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model for colorectal cancer. The performance of each GOF criterion was assessed by comparing the 1) root mean squared prediction error (RMSPE) of the selected parameters, 2) computation time of the calibration procedure of various calibration scenarios, and 3) impact on estimated cost-effectiveness ratios. Results. The likelihood-based deviance resulted in the lowest RMSPE in 4 of 6 calibration scenarios and was close to best in the other 2. The SSE had a 25 times higher RMSPE in a scenario with considerable differences in the values of observed outcomes, whereas the Pearson chi-square had a 60 times higher RMSPE in a scenario with multiple studies measuring the same outcome. In all scenarios, the SSE required the most computation time. The likelihood-based approach estimated the cost-effectiveness ratio most accurately (up to −0.15% relative difference versus 0.44% [SSE] and 13% [Pearson chi-square]). Conclusions. The likelihood-based deviance criteria lead to accurate estimation of parameters under various circumstances. These criteria are recommended for calibration in microsimulation disease models in contrast with other commonly used criteria.

Suggested Citation

  • Alex van der Steen & Joost van Rosmalen & Sonja Kroep & Frank van Hees & Ewout W. Steyerberg & Harry J. de Koning & Marjolein van Ballegooijen & Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, 2016. "Calibrating Parameters for Microsimulation Disease Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(5), pages 652-665, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:36:y:2016:i:5:p:652-665
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X16636851
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X16636851
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X16636851?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Neddermeijer, H.G. & van Oortmarssen, G.J. & Piersma, N. & Dekker, R. & Habbema, J.D.F., 2000. "Adaptive extensions of the Nelder and Mead Simplex Method for optimization of stochastic simulation models," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI 2000-22/A, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
    2. Alan Brennan & Stephen E. Chick & Ruth Davies, 2006. "A taxonomy of model structures for economic evaluation of health technologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(12), pages 1295-1310, December.
    3. Rutter, Carolyn M. & Miglioretti, Diana L. & Savarino, James E., 2009. "Bayesian Calibration of Microsimulation Models," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 104(488), pages 1338-1350.
    4. Heij, Christiaan & de Boer, Paul & Franses, Philip Hans & Kloek, Teun & van Dijk, Herman K., 2004. "Econometric Methods with Applications in Business and Economics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199268016.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jing Voon Chen & Julia L. Higle & Michael Hintlian, 2018. "A systematic approach for examining the impact of calibration uncertainty in disease modeling," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 541-561, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hassan Belkacem Ghassan & Abdelkrim Ahmed Guendouz, 2019. "Panel modeling of z-score: evidence from Islamic and conventional Saudi banks," International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(3), pages 448-468, July.
    2. Bernhard Ultsch & Oliver Damm & Philippe Beutels & Joke Bilcke & Bernd Brüggenjürgen & Andreas Gerber-Grote & Wolfgang Greiner & Germaine Hanquet & Raymond Hutubessy & Mark Jit & Mirjam Knol & Rüdiger, 2016. "Methods for Health Economic Evaluation of Vaccines and Immunization Decision Frameworks: A Consensus Framework from a European Vaccine Economics Community," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 227-244, March.
    3. Becky Pennington & Alex Filby & Lesley Owen & Matthew Taylor, 2018. "Smoking Cessation: A Comparison of Two Model Structures," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(9), pages 1101-1112, September.
    4. Peter J. Dodd & Jeff J. Pennington & Liza Bronner Murrison & David W. Dowdy, 2018. "Simple Inclusion of Complex Diagnostic Algorithms in Infectious Disease Models for Economic Evaluation," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(8), pages 930-941, November.
    5. Tirfi, Abera Gayesa & Oyekale, Abayomi Samuel, 2021. "Maize Output Supply Response to Climatic and Other Input Variables in Ethiopia," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, Asian Economic and Social Society (AESS), vol. 11(04), January.
    6. Jonathan Karnon & James Stahl & Alan Brennan & J. Jaime Caro & Javier Mar & Jörgen Möller, 2012. "Modeling Using Discrete Event Simulation," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(5), pages 701-711, September.
    7. H. K. Van Dijk & J. F. Kaashoek & A. P. M. Wagelmans, 2006. "‘Rotterdam econometrics’: an analysis of publications of the Econometric Institute 1956–2004," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 60(2), pages 85-111, May.
    8. Garcia-Swartz, Daniel D. & Muhamedagić, Mensur & Saenz, Diana, 2019. "The role of prices and network effects in the growth of the iPhone platform," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 110-122.
    9. Stuart J. Wright & William G. Newman & Katherine Payne, 2019. "Accounting for Capacity Constraints in Economic Evaluations of Precision Medicine: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(8), pages 1011-1027, August.
    10. Arielle Anderer & Hamsa Bastani & John Silberholz, 2022. "Adaptive Clinical Trial Designs with Surrogates: When Should We Bother?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(3), pages 1982-2002, March.
    11. Eren Demir & David Southern, 2017. "Enabling better management of patients: discrete event simulation combined with the STAR approach," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(5), pages 577-590, May.
    12. Jen Kruger & Daniel Pollard & Hasan Basarir & Praveen Thokala & Debbie Cooke & Marie Clark & Rod Bond & Simon Heller & Alan Brennan, 2015. "Incorporating Psychological Predictors of Treatment Response into Health Economic Simulation Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(7), pages 872-887, October.
    13. Abdelfatah Ichou, 2010. "Modelling the Determinants of Job Creation: Microeconometric Models Accounting for Latent Entrepreneurial Ability," Scales Research Reports H201018, EIM Business and Policy Research.
    14. Sarah Bates & Thomas Bayley & Paul Norman & Penny Breeze & Alan Brennan, 2020. "A Systematic Review of Methods to Predict Weight Trajectories in Health Economic Models of Behavioral Weight-Management Programs: The Potential Role of Psychosocial Factors," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 40(1), pages 90-105, January.
    15. Malik, Afia, 2018. "Fuel Demand in Pakistan's TRansport Sector," MPRA Paper 103455, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Benjamin Lev, 2005. "Book Reviews," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 260-266, June.
    17. Isaksen, Elisabeth T. & Narbel, Patrick A., 2017. "A carbon footprint proportional to expenditure - A case for Norway?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 152-165.
    18. N.D. Geomelos & E. Xideas, 2014. "Forecasting spot prices in bulk shipping using multivariate and univariate models," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 1-37, December.
    19. F. Tomini & F. Prinzen & A. D. I. Asselt, 2016. "A review of economic evaluation models for cardiac resynchronization therapy with implantable cardioverter defibrillators in patients with heart failure," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 17(9), pages 1159-1172, December.
    20. Beatriz Rodríguez-Sánchez & Luz María Peña-Longobardo & Juan Oliva-Moreno, 2022. "The employment situation of people living with HIV: a closer look at the effects of the 2008 economic crisis," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(3), pages 485-497, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:36:y:2016:i:5:p:652-665. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.