Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 May;33(4):463-71.
doi: 10.1177/0272989X13484388.

Value-of-information analysis within a stakeholder-driven research prioritization process in a US setting: an application in cancer genomics

Josh J Carlson  1 , Rahber Thariani  1 , Josh Roth  1 , Julie Gralow  1 , N Lynn Henry  2 , Laura Esmail  3 , Pat Deverka  3 , Scott D Ramsey  4 , Laurence Baker  2 , David L Veenstra  1
Affiliations

Value-of-information analysis within a stakeholder-driven research prioritization process in a US setting: an application in cancer genomics

Josh J Carlson et al. Med Decis Making. 2013 May.

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and outcomes of incorporating value-of-information (VOI) analysis into a stakeholder-driven research prioritization process in a US-based setting.

Methods: . Within a program to prioritize comparative effectiveness research areas in cancer genomics, over a period of 7 months, we developed decision-analytic models and calculated upper-bound VOI estimates for 3 previously selected genomic tests. Thirteen stakeholders representing patient advocates, payers, test developers, regulators, policy makers, and community-based oncologists ranked the tests before and after receiving VOI results. The stakeholders were surveyed about the usefulness and impact of the VOI findings.

Results: The estimated upper-bound VOI ranged from $33 million to $2.8 billion for the 3 research areas. Seven stakeholders indicated the results modified their rankings, 9 stated VOI data were useful, and all indicated they would support its use in future prioritization processes. Some stakeholders indicated expected value of sampled information might be the preferred choice when evaluating specific

Study design: Limitations. Our study was limited by the size and the potential for selection bias in the composition of the external stakeholder group, lack of a randomized design to assess effect of VOI data on rankings, and the use of expected value of perfect information v. expected value of sample information methods.

Conclusions: Value of information analyses may have a meaningful role in research topic prioritization for comparative effectiveness research in the United States, particularly when large differences in VOI across topic areas are identified. Additional research is needed to facilitate the use of more complex value of information analyses in this setting.

Keywords: decision analysis; economic analysis; value of information.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. VOI Research Prioritization Process
Figure 1 illustrates the research prioritization process including the development of decision-analytic models, education of stakeholders about VOI, presentation and discussion the VOI results followed by a re-ranking of tests, and the evaluation of the impact and stakeholders’ perceptions of the VOI analyses on the research prioritization process.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Meltzer D, Basu A, Conti R. The economics of comparative effectiveness studies: societal and private perspectives and their implications for prioritizing public investments in comparative effectiveness research. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(10):843–53. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Claxton KP, Sculpher MJ. Using value of information analysis to prioritise health research: some lessons from recent UK experience. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(11):1055–68. - PubMed
    1. Claxton K, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, Philips Z, Palmer S. A pilot study on the use of decision theory and value of information analysis as part of the NHS Health Technology Assessment programme. Health Technol Assess. 2004 Jul;8(31):1–103. iii. - PubMed
    1. Claxton K, Eggington S, Ginnelly L. A pilot study of using value of informaiton analysis to support research recommendations for the Natinal Institute of Clinical Excellence. London: Centre for Health Economics, University of York; 2005. - PubMed
    1. Myers ESG, Ravi D, Matchar D, Havrilesky L, Samsa G, Powers B, McBroom A, Musty M, Gray R, Erinoff EG. Evaluating the Potential Use of Modeling and Value-of-Information Analysis for Future Research Prioritization Within the Evidence-based Practice Center Program. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2011. (Prepared by the Duke Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2007-10066-I.) - PubMed

Publication types

Substances

LinkOut - more resources