Skip Navigation



QJM Advance Access published online on May 4, 2007

QJM, doi:10.1093/qjmed/hcm030
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
100/6/383    most recent
hcm030v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Benbassat, J.
Right arrow Articles by Baumal, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Benbassat, J.
Right arrow Articles by Baumal, R.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Association of Physicians. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The time horizons of formal decision analyses

J. Benbassat1 and R. Baumal2

From the 1Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute, The Smokler Center for Health Policy Research, Jerusalem, Israel, and 2Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Address correspondence to Professor J. Benbassat, Myers-JDC Brookdale Institute, PO Box 13087, Jerusalem 91037, Israel. email: benbasat{at}jdc.org.il


   Abstract

Clinical decision analyses use time horizons that vary from hours to the patient's entire life. Analyses of decisions with a lifetime horizon commonly use Markov models, which simulate the patient's lifespan by dividing it into equal periods (cycles). At each cycle, the model exposes a hypothetical cohort to the competing hazards of normal aging and of the disease in question (disease-specific hazards), and the results are presented as years of life expectancy. This paper highlights two limitations of lifetime Markov models that have been ignored in recent publications. First, since there are no readily available data on changes in disease-specific hazards over time, these hazards are often derived from short-term follow-up studies, and assumed to be constant over the patient's entire life. Second, results may be better presented in terms of health states (i.e. proportions of patients expected to recover completely, recover with a disability or die) rather than life expectancy. Although well-known, these two limitations require re-emphasis. They may be avoided by restricting the time horizon of decision analyses and presenting results as health states as well as life expectancies. When a lifetime horizon is necessary, the performance of Markov models may be improved by the using of time-variant disease-specific hazards derived from long-term follow-up studies, or from theoretical models that simulate more closely the disease progression over time, rather than assuming constant disease-specific hazards.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.