Exploring the Research Decision Space: The Expected Value of Information for Sequential Research Designs

Abstract

Purpose. To investigate the expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI) and the research decisions it can address. Methods. Expected value of information (EVI) analysis assesses the expected gain in net benefit from further research. Where the expected value of perfect information (EVPI) exceeds the costs of additional research, EVPPI can be used to identify parameters that contribute most to the EVPI and parameters with no EVPPI that may be disregarded as targets for further research. Recently, it was noted that parameters with low EVPPI for a one-off research design may be associated with high EVPPI when considered as part of a sequential design. This article examines the characteristics and role of conditional and sequential EVPPI in EVI analysis. Results. The calculation of EVPPI is demonstrated for single parameters, groups of parameters, and conditional and sequential EVPPI. Conditional EVPPI is the value of perfect information about one parameter, conditional on having obtained perfect information about another. Sequential EVPPI is the value of perfect information for a sequential research design to investigate first one parameter, then another. Conditional EVPPI differs from the individual EVPPI for a single parameter. Sequential EVPPI includes elements from the joint EVPPI for the parameters and the EVPPI for the first parameter in sequence. Sequential designs allow abandonment of research on the second parameter on the basis of additional information obtained on the first. Conclusions. The research decision space addressed by EVI analyses can be widened by incorporating sequential EVPPI to assess sequential research designs.

Keywords

value of information uncertainty decision making.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Stinnett AA , Mullahy J. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making. 1998;18(Suppl):S68-80.

Eckermann S. , Willan A. Expected value of information and decision making in HTA. Health Econ. 2006;26(2):195-209.

Griffin S. , Claxton K. , Palmer S. , Sculpher, M. Dangerous omissions: the consequences of ignoring decision uncertainty. Health Econ. Forthcoming.

Claxton K. The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ. 1999;18:342-64.

Raiffa H. , Schlaifer RO Applied Statistical Decision Theory. Boston: Division of Research, Harvard Business School; 1961.

Felli JC , Hazen GB Sensitivity analysis and the expected value of perfect information. Med Decis Making. 1998;18:95-109.

Reichard EG , Evans JS Assessing the value of hydrogeologic information for risk-based remedial action decisions. Water Resour Res. 1989;25(7):1451-60.

Dakins M. The value of the value of information. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment. 1999;5(2):281-9.

Brennan A. , Kharroubi S. , O’Hagan A. , Chilcott J. Calculating partial expected value of perfect information via Monte Carlo sampling algorithms. Med Decis Making. 2007 ;27:448-70.

10.

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;8:1-103, iii.

11.

Claxton K. , Neumann PJ , Araki S. , Weinstein MC Bayesian value-of-information analysis: an application to a policy model of Alzheimer’s disease. Int J Technol Assess Health Care . 2001;17: 38-55.

12.

Oakley J. Decision-Theoretic Sensitivity Analysis using Value of Information. Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos National Library; 2005.

13.

Briggs A. , Sculpher M. , Claxton K. Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation. Oxford : Oxford University Press; 2006.

14.

Thompson KM , Graham JD Going beyond a single number: using probabilistic risk assessment to improve risk management. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment. 1996;2(4):1008-34.

15.

Claxton K. , Eggington S. , Ginnelly L. , et al. A Pilot Study of Value of Information Analysis to Support Research Recommendations for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence . York, UK: Centre for Health Economics, University of York; 2005. Research paper 4.

16.

Yokota F. , Thompson KM Value of information literature analysis: a review of applications in health risk management. Med Decis Making. 2004;24:287-98.

17.

Yokota F. , Thompson KM Value of information analysis in environmental health risk management decisions: past, present, and future. Risk Anal. 2004 ;24(3):635-50.

18.

Philips Z. , Claxton K. , Palmer S. The half-life of truth: appropriate time horizons for research decisions? Med Decis Making. 2008;28:287-99.

19.

Ades AE , Lu G. , Claxton K. Expected value of sample information calculations in medical decision modeling . Med Decis Making. 2004;24:207-27.

20.

Conti S. , Claxton K. Dimensions of Design Space: A Decision-Theoretic Approach to Optimal Research Design. York, UK: Centre for Health Economics, University of York; 2008.

21.

Brand KP , Small MJ Updating uncertainty in an integrated risk assessment: conceptual framework and methods. Risk Anal. 1995;15(6):719-31.

22.

Chao H. , Peck SC , Wan YS Managing uncertainty: the tropospheric ozone challenge. Risk Anal. 1994;14(4):465-75.

23.

Welton NJ , Ades AE , Caldwell DM , Peters TJ Research prioritization based on expected value of partial perfect information: a case study on interventions to increase uptake of breast cancer screening . J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2008;171:807-41.

24.

Cox DC , Baybutt P. Methods for uncertainty analysis: a comparative survey. Risk Anal. 1981;1(4):251-8.