By the same authors

From the same journal

From the same journal

Simulation modeling for stratified breast cancer screening: a systematic review of cost and quality of life assumptions

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Simulation modeling for stratified breast cancer screening : a systematic review of cost and quality of life assumptions. / Arnold, Matthias.

In: BMC Health Services Research, Vol. 17, No. 1, 802, 02.12.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

Arnold, M 2017, 'Simulation modeling for stratified breast cancer screening: a systematic review of cost and quality of life assumptions', BMC Health Services Research, vol. 17, no. 1, 802. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2766-2

APA

Arnold, M. (2017). Simulation modeling for stratified breast cancer screening: a systematic review of cost and quality of life assumptions. BMC Health Services Research, 17(1), [802]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2766-2

Vancouver

Arnold M. Simulation modeling for stratified breast cancer screening: a systematic review of cost and quality of life assumptions. BMC Health Services Research. 2017 Dec 2;17(1). 802. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2766-2

Author

Arnold, Matthias. / Simulation modeling for stratified breast cancer screening : a systematic review of cost and quality of life assumptions. In: BMC Health Services Research. 2017 ; Vol. 17, No. 1.

Bibtex - Download

@article{0e7c35e293774225ad38f87291d497e3,
title = "Simulation modeling for stratified breast cancer screening: a systematic review of cost and quality of life assumptions",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: The economic evaluation of stratified breast cancer screening gains momentum, but produces also very diverse results. Systematic reviews so far focused on modeling techniques and epidemiologic assumptions. However, cost and utility parameters received only little attention. This systematic review assesses simulation models for stratified breast cancer screening based on their cost and utility parameters in each phase of breast cancer screening and care.METHODS: A literature review was conducted to compare economic evaluations with simulation models of personalized breast cancer screening. Study quality was assessed using reporting guidelines. Cost and utility inputs were extracted, standardized and structured using a care delivery framework. Studies were then clustered according to their study aim and parameters were compared within the clusters.RESULTS: Eighteen studies were identified within three study clusters. Reporting quality was very diverse in all three clusters. Only two studies in cluster 1, four studies in cluster 2 and one study in cluster 3 scored high in the quality appraisal. In addition to the quality appraisal, this review assessed if the simulation models were consistent in integrating all relevant phases of care, if utility parameters were consistent and methodological sound and if cost were compatible and consistent in the actual parameters used for screening, diagnostic work up and treatment. Of 18 studies, only three studies did not show signs of potential bias.CONCLUSION: This systematic review shows that a closer look into the cost and utility parameter can help to identify potential bias. Future simulation models should focus on integrating all relevant phases of care, using methodologically sound utility parameters and avoiding inconsistent cost parameters.",
keywords = "Journal Article",
author = "Matthias Arnold",
note = "{\circledC} The Author(s). 2017",
year = "2017",
month = "12",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1186/s12913-017-2766-2",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
journal = "BMC Health Services Research",
issn = "1472-6963",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) - Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Simulation modeling for stratified breast cancer screening

T2 - BMC Health Services Research

AU - Arnold, Matthias

N1 - © The Author(s). 2017

PY - 2017/12/2

Y1 - 2017/12/2

N2 - BACKGROUND: The economic evaluation of stratified breast cancer screening gains momentum, but produces also very diverse results. Systematic reviews so far focused on modeling techniques and epidemiologic assumptions. However, cost and utility parameters received only little attention. This systematic review assesses simulation models for stratified breast cancer screening based on their cost and utility parameters in each phase of breast cancer screening and care.METHODS: A literature review was conducted to compare economic evaluations with simulation models of personalized breast cancer screening. Study quality was assessed using reporting guidelines. Cost and utility inputs were extracted, standardized and structured using a care delivery framework. Studies were then clustered according to their study aim and parameters were compared within the clusters.RESULTS: Eighteen studies were identified within three study clusters. Reporting quality was very diverse in all three clusters. Only two studies in cluster 1, four studies in cluster 2 and one study in cluster 3 scored high in the quality appraisal. In addition to the quality appraisal, this review assessed if the simulation models were consistent in integrating all relevant phases of care, if utility parameters were consistent and methodological sound and if cost were compatible and consistent in the actual parameters used for screening, diagnostic work up and treatment. Of 18 studies, only three studies did not show signs of potential bias.CONCLUSION: This systematic review shows that a closer look into the cost and utility parameter can help to identify potential bias. Future simulation models should focus on integrating all relevant phases of care, using methodologically sound utility parameters and avoiding inconsistent cost parameters.

AB - BACKGROUND: The economic evaluation of stratified breast cancer screening gains momentum, but produces also very diverse results. Systematic reviews so far focused on modeling techniques and epidemiologic assumptions. However, cost and utility parameters received only little attention. This systematic review assesses simulation models for stratified breast cancer screening based on their cost and utility parameters in each phase of breast cancer screening and care.METHODS: A literature review was conducted to compare economic evaluations with simulation models of personalized breast cancer screening. Study quality was assessed using reporting guidelines. Cost and utility inputs were extracted, standardized and structured using a care delivery framework. Studies were then clustered according to their study aim and parameters were compared within the clusters.RESULTS: Eighteen studies were identified within three study clusters. Reporting quality was very diverse in all three clusters. Only two studies in cluster 1, four studies in cluster 2 and one study in cluster 3 scored high in the quality appraisal. In addition to the quality appraisal, this review assessed if the simulation models were consistent in integrating all relevant phases of care, if utility parameters were consistent and methodological sound and if cost were compatible and consistent in the actual parameters used for screening, diagnostic work up and treatment. Of 18 studies, only three studies did not show signs of potential bias.CONCLUSION: This systematic review shows that a closer look into the cost and utility parameter can help to identify potential bias. Future simulation models should focus on integrating all relevant phases of care, using methodologically sound utility parameters and avoiding inconsistent cost parameters.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1186/s12913-017-2766-2

DO - 10.1186/s12913-017-2766-2

M3 - Article

VL - 17

JO - BMC Health Services Research

JF - BMC Health Services Research

SN - 1472-6963

IS - 1

M1 - 802

ER -