IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gro/rugsom/10001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A state-of-the-art multi-criteria model for drug benefit-risk analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Hillege, H.L.
  • Buskens, E.
  • Postmus, D.
  • Tervonen, T.

    (Groningen University)

Abstract

Drug benefit-risk analysis is based on firm clinical evidence related to various safety and efficacy outcomes, such as tolerability, treatment response, and adverse events. In this paper, we propose a new approach for constructing a supporting multi-criteria model that fully takes into account this evidence. Our approach is based on the Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis (SMAA) methodology, which allows us to compute the typical value judgments that support a decision, to quantify uncertainty, and to compute a comprehensive benefit-risk profile. As an example, we constructed a multi-criteria model for the therapeutic group of second-generation antidepressants. We analyzed Fluoxetine, Paroxetine, Sertraline, and Venlafaxine according to relative efficacy and absolute rates of several common adverse drug reactions using meta-analytical data from the literature. Our model showed that there are clear trade-offs among the four drugs. Based on our experiences from this study, SMAA appears to be a suitable approach for quantifying trade-offs and decision uncertainty in drug benefit-risk analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Hillege, H.L. & Buskens, E. & Postmus, D. & Tervonen, T., 2010. "A state-of-the-art multi-criteria model for drug benefit-risk analysis," Research Report 10001, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    • Handle: RePEc:gro:rugsom:10001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/11370/f8221a93-19fd-4aee-8ae3-fb98470d893c
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kangas, Annika S. & Kangas, Jyrki & Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka, 2006. "Using SMAA-2 method with dependent uncertainties for strategic forest planning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 113-125, November.
    2. Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Martin Weber, 1993. "The Effect of Attribute Ranges on Weights in Multiattribute Utility Measurements," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(8), pages 937-943, August.
    3. Hokkanen, Joonas & Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka, 1999. "A multiple criteria decision model for analyzing and choosing among different development patterns for the Helsinki cargo harbor," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 1-23, March.
    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. Deniz Okul & Cevriye Gencer & Emel Kizilkaya Aydogan, 2014. "A Method Based on SMAA-Topsis for Stochastic Multi-Criteria Decision Making and a Real-World Application," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(05), pages 957-978.

    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. repec:dgr:rugsom:10001 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Risto Lahdelma & Pekka Salminen, 2001. "SMAA-2: Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis for Group Decision Making," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 444-454, June.
    3. R. Pelissari & M. C. Oliveira & S. Ben Amor & A. Kandakoglu & A. L. Helleno, 2020. "SMAA methods and their applications: a literature review and future research directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 433-493, October.
    4. Manel Baucells & Rakesh K. Sarin, 2003. "Group Decisions with Multiple Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(8), pages 1105-1118, August.
    5. Hayashi, Kiyotada, 1998. "Multicriteria aid for agricultural decisions using preference relations: methodology and application," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 483-503, December.
    6. Castillo, Geoffrey, 2020. "The attraction effect and its explanations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 123-147.
    7. Muhamet Aliu & Arbana Sahiti & Arben Sahiti, 2016. "Business Environment and Accounting System in Kosovo: Comparison of Different Periods," European Journal of Economics and Business Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 2, ejes_v2_i.
    8. Kangas, Jyrki & Store, Ron & Kangas, Annika, 2005. "Socioecological landscape planning approach and multicriteria acceptability analysis in multiple-purpose forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 603-614, May.
    9. Hafezi, Maryam & Zolfagharinia, Hossein, 2018. "Green product development and environmental performance: Investigating the role of government regulations," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 395-410.
    10. van Valkenhoef, Gert & Tervonen, Tommi, 2016. "Entropy-optimal weight constraint elicitation with additive multi-attribute utility models," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-12.
    11. Scholz, Michael & Dorner, Verena & Schryen, Guido & Benlian, Alexander, 2017. "A configuration-based recommender system for supporting e-commerce decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(1), pages 205-215.
    12. Lahdelma, Risto & Makkonen, Simo & Salminen, Pekka, 2009. "Two ways to handle dependent uncertainties in multi-criteria decision problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 79-92, February.
    13. Ralph L. Keeney, 2002. "Common Mistakes in Making Value Trade-Offs," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 935-945, December.
    14. Suk, Kwanho & Yoon, Song-Oh, 2012. "The moderating role of decision task goals in attribute weight convergence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 37-45.
    15. Sam Park, Kyung & Sang Lee, Kyung & Seong Eum, Yun & Park, Kwangtae, 2001. "Extended methods for identifying dominance and potential optimality in multi-criteria analysis with imprecise information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(3), pages 557-563, November.
    16. Gregory W. Fischer & Ziv Carmon & Dan Ariely & Gal Zauberman, 1999. "Goal-Based Construction of Preferences: Task Goals and the Prominence Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(8), pages 1057-1075, August.
    17. Verlegh, Peeter W.J. & Schifferstein, Hendrik N.J. & Wittink, Dick R., 2001. "Range And Number-Of-Levels Effects In Derived And Stated Measures Of Attribute Importance," Mansholt Working Papers 46449, Wageningen University, Mansholt Graduate School of Social Sciences.
    18. Durbach, Ian, 2009. "On the estimation of a satisficing model of choice using stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 497-509, June.
    19. Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka, 2002. "Pseudo-criteria versus linear utility function in stochastic multi-criteria acceptability analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(2), pages 454-469, September.
    20. Robin L. Dillon & Vicki M. Bier & Richard Sheffield John & Abdullah Althenayyan, 2023. "Closing the Gap Between Decision Analysis and Policy Analysts Before the Next Pandemic," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 109-132, June.
    21. Heribert Gierl & Christina Eleftheriadou, 2005. "Asymmetrisch überlegene Stockouts als Phantomprodukte," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 57(6), pages 475-502, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gro:rugsom:10001. 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: Hanneke Tamling (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ferugnl.html .

    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.