Expert Elicitation of Multinomial Probabilities for Decision-Analytic Modeling: An Application to Rates of Disease Progression in Undiagnosed and Untreated Melanoma.
View / Open Files
Publication Date
2018-06Journal Title
Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
ISSN
1098-3015
Publisher
Elsevier
Volume
21
Issue
6
Pages
669-676
Language
eng
Type
Article
This Version
AM
Physical Medium
Print-Electronic
Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
Wilson, E., Usher-Smith, J., Emery, J., Corrie, P. G., & Walter, F. (2018). Expert Elicitation of Multinomial Probabilities for Decision-Analytic Modeling: An Application to Rates of Disease Progression in Undiagnosed and Untreated Melanoma.. Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 21 (6), 669-676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.10.009
Abstract
Background: Expert elicitation is required to inform decision making where relevant ‘better quality’ data either do not exist or cannot be collected. An example of this is to inform decisions as to whether to screen for melanoma. A key input is the counterfactual, in this case the natural history of melanoma in patients who are undiagnosed and hence untreated.
Objectives: To elicit expert opinion on the probability of disease progression in patients with melanoma that is undetected and hence untreated.
Methods: Bespoke webinar-based expert elicitation protocol administered to 14 participants in the UK, Australia and New Zealand, comprising 12 multinomial questions on the probability of progression from one disease stage to another in the absence of treatment. A modified Connor-Mosimann distribution was fitted to individual responses to each question. Individual responses were pooled using a Monte Carlo simulation approach. Participants were asked to provide feedback on the process.
Results: A pooled modified Connor-Mosimann distribution was successfully derived from participants’ responses. Feedback from participants was generally positive with 86% willing to take part in such an exercise again. However, only 57% of participants felt this was a valid approach to determine the risk of disease progression. Qualitative feedback reflected some understanding of the need to rely on expert elicitation in the absence of ‘hard’ data.
Conclusion: We successfully elicited and pooled the beliefs of experts in melanoma regarding the probability of disease progression in a format suitable for inclusion in a decision analytic model.
Keywords
Humans, Melanoma, Skin Neoplasms, Disease Progression, Monte Carlo Method, Probability, Risk, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Consensus, Decision Support Techniques, Feedback
Sponsorship
National Institute for Health Research (NIHR-CS-012-030)
Identifiers
External DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.10.009
This record's URL: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/271086
Rights
Licence:
http://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved