IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v42y2022i7p872-884.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Metamodeling for Policy Simulations with Multivariate Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Huaiyang Zhong

    (Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA)

  • Margaret L. Brandeau

    (Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA)

  • Golnaz Eftekhari Yazdi

    (Section of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Jianing Wang

    (Section of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Shayla Nolen

    (Section of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Liesl Hagan
  • William W. Thompson

    (Division of Viral Hepatitis, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA)

  • Sabrina A. Assoumou

    (Section of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Benjamin P. Linas

    (Section of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Joshua A. Salomon

    (Center for Health Policy and Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA)

Abstract

Purpose Metamodels are simplified approximations of more complex models that can be used as surrogates for the original models. Challenges in using metamodels for policy analysis arise when there are multiple correlated outputs of interest. We develop a framework for metamodeling with policy simulations to accommodate multivariate outcomes. Methods: We combine 2 algorithm adaptation methods—multitarget stacking and regression chain with maximum correlation—with different base learners including linear regression (LR), elastic net (EE) with second-order terms, Gaussian process regression (GPR), random forests (RFs), and neural networks. We optimize integrated models using variable selection and hyperparameter tuning. We compare the accuracy, efficiency, and interpretability of different approaches. As an example application, we develop metamodels to emulate a microsimulation model of testing and treatment strategies for hepatitis C in correctional settings. Results Output variables from the simulation model were correlated (average Ï = 0.58). Without multioutput algorithm adaptation methods, in-sample fit (measured by R 2 ) ranged from 0.881 for LR to 0.987 for GPR. The multioutput algorithm adaptation method increased R 2 by an average 0.002 across base learners. Variable selection and hyperparameter tuning increased R 2 by 0.009. Simpler models such as LR, EE, and RF required minimal training and prediction time. LR and EE had advantages in model interpretability, and we considered methods for improving the interpretability of other models. Conclusions In our example application, the choice of base learner had the largest impact on R 2 ; multioutput algorithm adaptation and variable selection and hyperparameter tuning had a modest impact. Although advantages and disadvantages of specific learning algorithms may vary across different modeling applications, our framework for metamodeling in policy analyses with multivariate outcomes has broad applicability to decision analysis in health and medicine.

Suggested Citation

  • Huaiyang Zhong & Margaret L. Brandeau & Golnaz Eftekhari Yazdi & Jianing Wang & Shayla Nolen & Liesl Hagan & William W. Thompson & Sabrina A. Assoumou & Benjamin P. Linas & Joshua A. Salomon, 2022. "Metamodeling for Policy Simulations with Multivariate Outcomes," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 42(7), pages 872-884, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:42:y:2022:i:7:p:872-884
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X221105079
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X221105079
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X221105079?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
    ---><---

    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:42:y:2022:i:7:p:872-884. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.