Back

Proposing a Weight-Based Expectation-Maximization Algorithm for Estimating Discrete-Time Markov Transition Probability Matrices with a Proof-of-Concept Example in Health Technology Assessment

Bollee, M.; Dutta Majumdar, A.

2025-01-02 health economics
10.1101/2025.01.02.25319899 medRxiv
Show abstract

Discrete-time Markov cohort-state transition models are now well-established as the preferred choice of analysts across application areas including health technology assessment. This preference arises out of its relative intuition and its capability to strike a fine balance between complex disease pathways, statistical precision, and parsimony although being criticized by a wide variety of stakeholders. Transition probability matrices (TPMs) are the "heart and soul" of such models responsible for estimating patient dispositions. However, estimating such TPMs comes with its own set of challenges. In some situations, the transition data may be censored such that the health state of a patient is unknown for multiple time steps before the next observation or data immaturity especially in rare diseases. Craig and Sendi proposed the expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm using uniform weights as a solution for unequal estimation intervals for partially observed data. However, this typically comes at the cost of increased within-state output variations with no optimization technique available in the literature. The objective of this paper is to explore an optimized weighted version of the original EM algorithm, that aims to estimate the set of weights which minimizes the uncertainty of the estimated TPM against a target objective function. The weighting reduces the uncertainty of the estimate by considering the difference in temporal sparsity of the data when there are missing time steps. Further, we demonstrate the applicability of this weighting method using a fictitious cost-effectiveness model with our approach, showing a fine but definitive change over the original approach.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Statistics in Medicine
40 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
35.5%
2
Medical Decision Making
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
13.1%
3
Value in Health
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.2%
50% of probability mass above
4
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 12%
6.5%
5
Journal of Medical Internet Research
87 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.5%
6
BMC Medical Research Methodology
47 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.9%
7
Journal of Theoretical Biology
162 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
2.8%
8
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 44%
2.2%
9
Research Synthesis Methods
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.2%
10
Bioinformatics
1204 papers in training set
Top 6%
2.1%
11
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
12
IEEE Access
35 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.2%
13
Statistical Methods in Medical Research
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
14
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.0%
15
BMC Bioinformatics
457 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
16
Biometrics
23 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
17
Frontiers in Public Health
148 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
18
European Radiology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
19
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
47 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
20
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 23%
0.5%
21
Trials
29 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
22
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
23
The Annals of Applied Statistics
19 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.5%