A systematic review of whole disease models for informing healthcare resource allocation decisions

PLoS One. 2023 Sep 14;18(9):e0291366. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291366. eCollection 2023.

Abstract

Background: Whole disease models (WDM) are large-scale, system-level models which can evaluate multiple decision questions across an entire care pathway. Whilst this type of model can offer several advantages as a platform for undertaking economic analyses, the availability and quality of existing WDMs is unknown.

Objectives: This systematic review aimed to identify existing WDMs to explore which disease areas they cover, to critically assess the quality of these models and provide recommendations for future research.

Methods: An electronic search was performed on multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the Health Technology Assessment database) on 23rd July 2023. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion. Study quality was assessed using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) appraisal checklist for economic evaluations. Model characteristics were descriptively summarised.

Results: Forty-four WDMs were identified, of which thirty-two were developed after 2010. The main disease areas covered by existing WDMs are heart disease, cancer, acquired immune deficiency syndrome and metabolic disease. The quality of included WDMs is generally low. Common limitations included failure to consider the harms and costs of adverse events (AEs) of interventions, lack of probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and poor reporting.

Conclusions: There has been an increase in the number of WDMs since 2010. However, their quality is generally low which means they may require significant modification before they could be re-used, such as modelling AEs of interventions and incorporation of PSA. Sufficient details of the WDMs need to be reported to allow future reuse/adaptation.

Publication types

  • Systematic Review
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome*
  • Checklist
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Critical Pathways
  • Humans
  • Resource Allocation

Grants and funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work. XL receives PhD scholarship (EP/R513143/1) from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), UK (https://www.ukri.org/councils/epsrc/). EPSRC had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.