2010
DOI: 10.3310/hta14250
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Avoiding and identifying errors in health technology assessment models: qualitative study and methodological review

Abstract: How to obtain copies of this and other HTA programme reports An electronic version of this title, in Adobe Acrobat format, is available for downloading free of charge for personal use from the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk). A fully searchable DVD is also available (see below).Printed copies of HTA journal series issues cost £20 each (post and packing free in the UK) to both public and private sector purchasers from our despatch agents.Non-UK purchasers will have to pay a small fee for post and packing. For Europ… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
80
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 62 publications
(80 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
(53 reference statements)
0
80
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To maximise internal validity we followed expert recommendations, consensus modelling guidelines and NICE technical guidance. [57][58][59][60] Our base-case analysis followed NICE reference case methodology, taking the perspective of the UK NHS DH (the primary decision-maker) and employing a lifetime horizon.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To maximise internal validity we followed expert recommendations, consensus modelling guidelines and NICE technical guidance. [57][58][59][60] Our base-case analysis followed NICE reference case methodology, taking the perspective of the UK NHS DH (the primary decision-maker) and employing a lifetime horizon.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[22][23][24] The models were verified internally (to ensure correct programming) and validated (to ensure consistency with expected results -for example, that survival times and levels of service use are realistic). In addition, each of the models was reviewed by an experienced modeller with expertise in DES, who worked with the teams to ensure that any identified errors or inconsistencies were corrected.…”
Section: Verification and Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…23 The model was verified internally (to ensure correct programming) and validated externally (to ensure consistency with expected results, e.g. that survival times and levels of service use were realistic).…”
Section: Case Study 1: Full Guideline Model For Prostate Cancermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3.0 Qualitative methods to understand and inform the process of future model development A number of studies have used qualitative methods to understand modelling practices and produce findings to inform future model development [18][19][20][21][22][23][24]. These studies all aimed to explore 'real' modelling processes, seeking to understand model development from the perspective of those involved and generate findings aimed at improving modelling methods.…”
Section: Qualitative Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly using informant perspectives to understand issues with model development, were two related papers that undertook focus groups [19,20], and one study using in-depth interviews with modellers [21]. Both methodological approaches generated rich data through asking informants to describe their modelling practices, and asking questions about where current approaches required improvement.…”
Section: Qualitative Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%