Back

Improving Cycle Corrections in Discrete Time Markov Models: A Gaussian Quadrature Approach

Srivastava, T.; Strong, M.; Stevenson, M. D.; Dodd, P. J.

2020-07-29 health economics
10.1101/2020.07.27.20162651 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionDiscrete-time Markov models are widely used within health economic modelling. Analyses usually associate costs and health outcomes with health states and calculate totals for each decision option over some timeframe. Frequently, a correction method (e.g. half-cycle correction) is applied to unadjusted model outputs to yield an approximation to an assumed underlying continuous-time Markov model. In this study, we introduce a novel approximation method based on Gaussian Quadrature (GQ). MethodsWe exploited analytical results for time-homogeneous Markov chains to derive a new GQ-based approximation, which is applied to an unadjusted discrete-time model output. The GQ method approximates a continuous-time Markov model result by approximating a correction matrix, formulated as an integral, using a weighted sum of integrand values at specified points. GQ approximations can be made arbitrarily accurate by increasing order of the approximation. We compared the first five orders of GQ approximation with four existing cycle correction methods (half-cycle correction, trapezoidal and Simpsons 1/3 and 3/8 rules) across 100,000 randomly generated input parameter-sets. ResultsWe show that first-order GQ method is identical to half-cycle correction method, which is itself equivalent to trapezoidal method. The second-order GQ is identical to Simpsons 1/3 method. The third, fourth and fifth order GQ methods are novel in this context and provide increasingly accurate approximations to the output of the continuoustime model. In our simulation study, fifth-order GQ method outperformed other existing methods in over 99.8% of simulations. Of the existing methods, Simpsons 1/3 rule performed the best. ConclusionOur novel GQ-based approximation outperforms other cycle correction methods for time-homogeneous models. The method is easy to implement, and R code and an Excel workbook are provided as supplementary materials.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 3%
28.6%
2
Medical Decision Making
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.3%
50% of probability mass above
3
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 7%
5.0%
4
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
5
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.7%
6
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.7%
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 42%
3.0%
8
Research Synthesis Methods
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
9
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.0%
10
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
11
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.5%
12
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
13
BMC Neurology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
14
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
15
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
16
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
84 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
17
Environmental Research Letters
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
18
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
11 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
19
Statistics in Medicine
34 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
20
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
21
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
22
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%
23
Journal of Medical Economics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.5%
24
Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering
23 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%
25
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%