IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v39y2019i5p509-522.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Beate Jahn

    (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)

  • Christina Kurzthaler

    (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
    Institut für Theoretische Physik, Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria)

  • Jagpreet Chhatwal

    (Institute for Technology Assessment and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Elamin H. Elbasha

    (Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA)

  • Annette Conrads-Frank

    (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)

  • Ursula Rochau

    (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)

  • Gaby Sroczynski

    (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)

  • Christoph Urach

    (dwh GmbH—Simulation Services and Technical Solutions, Vienna, Austria)

  • Marvin Bundo

    (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)

  • Niki Popper

    (dwh GmbH—Simulation Services and Technical Solutions, Vienna, Austria
    Institute for Analysis and Scientific Computing, Technical University, Vienna, Austria
    DEXHELPP—Decision Support for Health Policy and Planning, Vienna, Austria)

  • Uwe Siebert

    (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
    Institute for Technology Assessment and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
    Center for Health Decision Science, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA)

Abstract

Background . 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. Design . 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. Results . 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. Conclusions . 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.

Suggested Citation

  • Beate Jahn & Christina Kurzthaler & Jagpreet Chhatwal & Elamin H. Elbasha & Annette Conrads-Frank & Ursula Rochau & Gaby Sroczynski & Christoph Urach & Marvin Bundo & Niki Popper & Uwe Siebert, 2019. "Alternative Conversion Methods for Transition Probabilities in State-Transition Models: Validity and Impact on Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 39(5), pages 509-522, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:39:y:2019:i:5:p:509-522
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X19851095
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X19851095
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X19851095?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. Robert A. Jarrow & David Lando & Stuart M. Turnbull, 2008. "A Markov Model for the Term Structure of Credit Risk Spreads," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Financial Derivatives Pricing Selected Works of Robert Jarrow, chapter 18, pages 411-453, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Bruce A. Craig & Peter P. Sendi, 2002. "Estimation of the transition matrix of a discrete‐time Markov chain," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(1), pages 33-42, January.
    3. Briggs, Andrew & Sculpher, Mark & Claxton, Karl, 2006. "Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198526629.
    4. Sixten Borg & Ulf Persson & Tine Jess & Ole Østergaard Thomsen & Tryggve Ljung & Lene Riis & Pia Munkholm, 2010. "A Maximum Likelihood Estimator of a Markov Model for Disease Activity in Crohn’s Disease and Ulcerative Colitis for Annually Aggregated Partial Observations," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(1), pages 132-142, January.
    5. Mr. Matthew T Jones, 2005. "Estimating Markov Transition Matrices Using Proportions Data: An Application to Credit Risk," IMF Working Papers 2005/219, International Monetary Fund.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Risha Gidwani & Louise B. Russell, 2020. "Estimating Transition Probabilities from Published Evidence: A Tutorial for Decision Modelers," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(11), pages 1153-1164, November.
    2. Timothy Spelman & William L. Herring & Yuanhui Zhang & Michael Tempest & Isobel Pearson & Ulrich Freudensprung & Carlos Acosta & Thibaut Dort & Robert Hyde & Eva Havrdova & Dana Horakova & Maria Troja, 2022. "Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Natalizumab and Fingolimod in Patients with Inadequate Response to Disease-Modifying Therapies in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in the Unit," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 323-339, March.
    3. Jagpreet Chhatwal & Suren Jayasuriya & Elamin H. Elbasha, 2016. "Changing Cycle Lengths in State-Transition Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(8), pages 952-964, November.
    4. John Leventides & Konstantinos Lefkaditis & Anna Donatou & Evangelos Melas & Costas Poulios, 2023. "Development of a Transition Matrix Model of Credit Rating of Companies based on Forecasted Macro Factors: the Case of Greece," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 13(5), pages 1-3.
    5. Chiranjeev Sanyal & Don Husereau, 2020. "Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Services Provided by Community Pharmacists," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 375-392, June.
    6. Ammann, Manuel & Kind, Axel & Wilde, Christian, 2003. "Are convertible bonds underpriced? An analysis of the French market," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 635-653, April.
    7. Mark Oppe & Daniela Ortín-Sulbarán & Carlos Vila Silván & Anabel Estévez-Carrillo & Juan M. Ramos-Goñi, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness of adding Sativex® spray to spasticity care in Belgium: using bootstrapping instead of Monte Carlo simulation for probabilistic sensitivity analyses," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(5), pages 711-721, July.
    8. Kaitlyn Hastings & Clara Marquina & Jedidiah Morton & Dina Abushanab & Danielle Berkovic & Stella Talic & Ella Zomer & Danny Liew & Zanfina Ademi, 2022. "Projected New-Onset Cardiovascular Disease by Socioeconomic Group in Australia," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 449-460, April.
    9. Andrea Marcellusi & Raffaella Viti & Loreta A. Kondili & Stefano Rosato & Stefano Vella & Francesco Saverio Mennini, 2019. "Economic Consequences of Investing in Anti-HCV Antiviral Treatment from the Italian NHS Perspective: A Real-World-Based Analysis of PITER Data," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 255-266, February.
    10. Bjork, Tomas, 2009. "Arbitrage Theory in Continuous Time," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 3, number 9780199574742.
    11. Hong-Ming Yin & Jin Liang & Yuan Wu, 2018. "On a New Corporate Bond Pricing Model with Potential Credit Rating Change and Stochastic Interest Rate," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-12, December.
    12. Joseph F. Levy & Marjorie A. Rosenberg, 2019. "A Latent Class Approach to Modeling Trajectories of Health Care Cost in Pediatric Cystic Fibrosis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 39(5), pages 593-604, July.
    13. Augusto Castillo, 2004. "Firm and Corporate Bond Valuation: A Simulation Dynamic Programming Approach," Latin American Journal of Economics-formerly Cuadernos de Economía, Instituto de Economía. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile., vol. 41(124), pages 345-360.
    14. Nusrat Jahan, 2022. "Macroeconomic Determinants of Corporate Credit Spreads: Evidence from Canada," Carleton Economic Papers 22-07, Carleton University, Department of Economics.
    15. Qi Cao & Erik Buskens & Hans L. Hillege & Tiny Jaarsma & Maarten Postma & Douwe Postmus, 2019. "Stratified treatment recommendation or one-size-fits-all? A health economic insight based on graphical exploration," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(3), pages 475-482, April.
    16. Jorge Luis García & James J. Heckman, 2021. "Early childhood education and life‐cycle health," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(S1), pages 119-141, November.
    17. SOLNIK, Bruno & COLLIN-DUFRESNE, Pierre, 2000. "On the term structure of default premia in the Swap and Libor markets," HEC Research Papers Series 704, HEC Paris.
    18. Regis Houssou & Olivier Besson, 2010. "Indifference of Defaultable Bonds with Stochastic Intensity models," Papers 1003.4118, arXiv.org.
    19. Michael C. Munnix & Rudi Schafer & Thomas Guhr, 2011. "A Random Matrix Approach to Credit Risk," Papers 1102.3900, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2011.
    20. Tushar Srivastava & Nicholas R. Latimer & Paul Tappenden, 2021. "Estimation of Transition Probabilities for State-Transition Models: A Review of NICE Appraisals," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(8), pages 869-878, August.

    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:39:y:2019:i:5:p:509-522. 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.