Efficient patient-level health economic modelling in Excel without VBA: A Tutorial
Blissett, R. S.; Sullivan, W.; Subban, I.; Igloi-Nagy, A.
Show abstract
Cohort-level models in Microsoft Excel(R) remain the standard for cost-effectiveness modelling to inform health technology assessment (HTA), despite calls and rationale for more flexible approaches. Their limited ability to capture patient-level characteristics can, in the presence of patient heterogeneity or the need to track patient characteristics to accurately capture a technologys implications, introduce bias. Their continued prevalence is explained by key stakeholders familiarity with spreadsheet software, and the lower computational burden of cohort-level versus patient-level models. However, contemporary Excel functions have opened up possibilities for efficient calculations within native Excel that enable more flexible, patient-level approaches to be implemented in familiar spreadsheet-based software. Therefore, this tutorial aims to provide step-by-step guidance on how to implement a previously published and freely available individual-level discrete event simulation (DES) in Excel, using contemporary Excel functions and without any Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) code. Key Points for Decision-MakersO_LIPerceived and real requirements for cost-effectiveness models for HTA to be built in Excel may have led to overuse of cohort-level approaches, with probable bias implications for HTA decision-making. C_LIO_LIContemporary Excel functions now allow the efficient implementation and execution of patient-level model calculations within native Excel, without any VBA code. Such capabilities may reduce technical barriers across key stakeholders, enhance transparency, and ultimately lead to improvements in HTA decision-making. C_LIO_LIThis tutorial demonstrates provides step-by-step guidance on how to implement an efficient patient-level cost-effectiveness model in Excel without any VBA, with an executable model example included as supplementary material. C_LI
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A flexible formula for incorporating distributive concerns into cost-effectiveness analyses: priority weights 92%
- Clinical code sets and the problem of redundancy in code set repositories 92%
- Time-to-event estimation of birth year prevalence trends: a method to enable investigating the etiology of childhood disorders including autism 92%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- New IPECAD open-source model framework for the health technology assessment of early Alzheimer’s disease treatment: development and use cases 90%
- Emerging Therapies for COVID-19: the value of information from more clinical trials 90%
- Statistical Decision Properties of Imprecise Trials Assessing COVID-19 Drugs 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Modelling vaccination capacity at mass vaccination hubs and general practice clinics 91%
- Spatio-temporal modelling of referrals to outpatient respiratory clinics in the integrated care system of the Morecambe Bay area, England 91%
- Cost-effectiveness of whole area testing of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections in Merthyr Tydfil, 2020: A Modelling and economic analysis 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and Validation of ‘Patient Optimizer’ (POP) Algorithms for Predicting Surgical Risk with Machine Learning 93%
- Combining symbolic regression with the Cox proportional hazards model improves prediction of heart failure deaths 92%
- A Multi-Granular Stacked Regression for Forecasting Long-Term Demand in Emergency Departments 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.