Cross-model comparisons to improve the value of modeling: the case of colorectal cancer screening.

摘要

Policy makers need rigorous and transparent methods to compare and evaluate different health care strategies. To compare strategies for the same condition, head-to-head trials are often impractical because they require large sample sizes and years to conduct, and they are not well suited for comparing multiple different options or measuring long-term outcomes. Modeling may offer advantages for conducting this type of comparative effectiveness research because of its ability to compare multiple strategies, including different combinations of interventions and different time intervals. In addition, cost-effectiveness modeling can examine incremental efficiency (cost per unit of health gained compared with the next best strategy), thus providing information directly relevant to decision makers.