Machine learning models for abstract screening task - A systematic literature review application for health economics and outcome research.

OBJECTIVE: Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) are critical for life-science research. However, the manual selection and retrieval of relevant publications can be a time-consuming process. This study aims to (1) develop two disease-specific annotated corpora, one for human papillomavirus (HPV) associated diseases and the other for pneumococcal-associated pediatric diseases (PAPD), and (2) optimize machine- and deep-learning models to facilitate automation of the SLR abstract screening. METHODS: This study constructed two disease-specific SLR screening corpora for HPV and PAPD, which contained citation metadata and corresponding abstracts. Performance was evaluated using precision, recall, accuracy, and F1-score of multiple combinations of machine- and deep-learning algorithms and features such as keywords and MeSH terms. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The HPV corpus contained 1697 entries, with 538 relevant and 1159 irrelevant articles. The PAPD corpus included 2865 entries, with 711 relevant and 2154 irrelevant articles. Adding additional features beyond title and abstract improved the performance (measured in Accuracy) of machine learning models by 3% for HPV corpus and 2% for PAPD corpus. Transformer-based deep learning models that consistently outperformed conventional machine learning algorithms, highlighting the strength of domain-specific pre-trained language models for SLR abstract screening. This study provides a foundation for the development of more intelligent SLR systems.

Medical Economic Effect of Pharmaceutical Interventions by Board-Certified Pharmacists in Palliative Pharmacy for Patients with Cancer Using Medical Narcotics in Japan: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: The Japanese Society for Pharmaceutical Palliative Care and Sciences specializes in pharmacology in the field of palliative medicine. More than 700 board-certified pharmacists in palliative pharmacy (BCPPP) are actively involved in palliative pharmacotherapy at various hospitals and pharmacies. The purpose of this study was to determine the economic effect of pharmaceutical interventions by BCPPPs. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study included 27 medical centers and analyzed the medical economic effect of interventions by BCPPPs (17 pharmacists) and non-BCPPPs (24 pharmacists) on patients using medical narcotics for cancer pain in September 2021. RESULTS: The percentage of patients who received a pharmaceutical intervention and whose drug costs were reduced by pharmacist intervention was significantly higher in the BCPPP group than in the non-BCPPP group. Although there was no significant difference between the two groups in drug cost reduction per patient per month (BCPPP group: $0.89 [-$64.91 to $106.76] vs. non-BCPPP group $0.00 [-$1,828.95 to $25.82]; P = 0.730), the medical economic benefit of pharmacist intervention in avoiding or reducing adverse drug reactions was higher in the BCPPP group ($103.18 [$0.00 to $628.03]) than in the non-BCPPP group ($0.00 [$0.00 to $628.03]) (P = 0.070). The total medical economic benefit-the sum of these-was significantly higher in the BCPPP group ($88.82 [-$14.62 to $705.37]) than in the non-BCPPP group ($0.66 [-$1,200.93 to $269.61]) (P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Pharmacological intervention for patients with cancer using medical narcotics may have a greater medical economic benefit when managed by BCPPPs than by non-certified pharmacists in Japan.

Health economics of detection and treatment of children with familial hypercholesterolemia: to screen or not to screen is no longer the question.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) is one of the most common monogenic disorders and is safely treatable with lipid-lowering medication. However, most individuals with HeFH remain untreated and undetected, especially in paediatric populations where the potential for long-term therapeutic benefit is higher. Here, we review the recent literature on health economic outcomes for the detection and management of FH in children. RECENT FINDINGS: A targeted literature review identified eight studies evaluating detection and management strategies for paediatric FH populations in the last 25 years. Most studies conducted modelled cost-effectiveness analyses to understand the long-term impact of these strategies on health outcomes and the financial impact on the healthcare system. All studies reported that detection and management of HeFH in paediatric populations was cost-effective, regardless of the age of the children. However, cost-effectiveness varied depending on the method of case ascertainment - targeted screening was generally cheaper overall, but less effective, than whole-of-population screening, although both methods were generally cost-effective. SUMMARY: Detection and management of HeFH in paediatric populations is a cost-effective way to significantly lower the burden of disease later in life for these individuals. These strategies should be implemented across healthcare systems.

Challenges and opportunities in building a health economic framework for personalized medicine in oncology.

Personalized medicine has allowed for knowledge at an individual level for several diseases and this has led to improvements in prevention and treatment of various types of neoplasms. Despite the greater availability of tests, the costs of genomic testing and targeted therapies are still high for most patients, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Although value frameworks and health technology assessment are fundamental to allow decision-making by policymakers, there are several concerns in terms of personalized medicine pharmacoeconomics. A global effort may improve these tools in order to allow access to personalized medicine for an increasing number of patients with cancer.

Why do consumers choose private over public health services? Reflective accounts of health providers in Vietnam.

BACKGROUND: In Vietnam and many developing countries, private healthcare is increasingly being leveraged by governments to complement public services and increase health service access and utilisation. Extensive understanding of patterns of utilisation of private over public health services, and the rationale for such consumer decisions, is important to ensure and promote safe, affordable and patient-centred care in the two sectors. Few studies within the Southeast Asian Region have explored how private and public providers interact (via social networks, marketing, and direct contact) with consumers to affect their service choices. This study investigates providers' views on social factors associated with the use of private over public health services in Vietnam. METHOD: A thematic analysis was undertaken of 30 semi-structured interviews with experienced health system stakeholders from the Vietnam national assembly, government ministries, private health associations, health economic association, as well as public and private hospitals and clinics. RESULTS: Multiple social factors were found to influence the choice of private over public services, including word-of-mouth, the patient-doctor relationship and relationships between healthcare providers, healthcare staff attitudes and behaviour, and marketing. While private providers maximise their use of these social factors, most public providers seem to ignore or show only limited interest in using marketing and other forms of social interaction to improve services to meet patients' needs, especially those needs beyond strictly medical intervention. However, private providers faced their own particular challenges related to over-advertisement, over-servicing, excessive focus on patients' demands rather than medical needs, as well as the significant technical requirements for quality and safety. CONCLUSIONS: This study has important implications for policy and practice in Vietnam. First, public providers must embrace social interaction with consumers as an effective strategy to improve their service quality. Second, appropriate regulations of private providers are required to protect patients from unnecessary treatments, costs and potential harm. Finally, the insights from this study have direct relevance to many developing countries facing a similar challenge of appropriately managing the growth of the private health sector.

Can decision field theory enhance our understanding of health-based choices? Evidence from risky health behaviors.

Discrete choice models are almost exclusively estimated assuming random utility maximization (RUM) is the decision rule applied by individuals. Recent studies indicate alternative behavioral assumptions may be more appropriate in health. Decision field theory (DFT) is a psychological theory of decision-making, which has shown promise in transport research. This study introduces DFT to health economics, empirically comparing it to RUM and random regret minimization (RRM) in risky health settings, namely tobacco and vaccine choices. Model fit, parameter ratios, choice shares, and elasticities are compared between RUM, RRM and DFT. Test statistics for model differences are derived using bootstrap methods. Decision rule heterogeneity is investigated using latent class models, including novel latent class DFT models. Tobacco and vaccine choice data are better explained with DFT than with RUM or RRM. Parameter ratios, choice shares and elasticities differ significantly between models. Mixed results are found for the presence of decision rule heterogeneity. We conclude that DFT shows promise as a behavioral assumption that underpins the estimation of discrete choice models in health economics. The significant differences demonstrate that care should be taken when choosing a decision rule, but further evidence is needed for generalizability beyond risky health choices.

Applying value-based strategies to accelerate access to novel cancer medications: guidance from the Oncology Health Economics Expert Panel in Qatar (Q-OHEP).

BACKGROUND: In line with global trends, cancer incidence and mortality may have decreased for specific types of cancer in Qatar. However, the cancer-related burden on patients, healthcare systems, and the economy is expected to expand; thus, cancer remains a significant public healthcare issue in Qatar. Qatar's free access to cancer care represents a considerable economic burden. Ensuring the best utilization of financial resources in the healthcare sector is important to provide unified and fair access to cancer care for all patients. Experts from the Qatar Oncology Health Economics Expert Panel (Q-OHEP) aimed to establish a consistent and robust base for evaluating oncology/hematology medications; involve patients' insights to accelerate access to cutting-edge medications; increase the value of cancer care; and reach a consensus for using cost-effective strategies and efficient methodologies in cancer treatment. METHODS: The Q-OHEP convened on 30 November 2021 for a 3-hour meeting to discuss cancer management, therapeutics, and health economics in Qatar, focusing on four domains: (1) regulatory, (2) procurement, (3) treatment, and (4) patients. Discussions, guided by a moderator, focused on a list of suggested open-ended questions. RESULTS: Some of the salient recommendations included the development of a formal, fast-track, preliminary approval pathway for drugs needed by patients with severe disease or in critical condition; and encouraging and promoting the conduct of local clinical trials and real-world observational studies using existing registry data. The Q-OHEP also recommended implementing a forecast system using treatment center data based on the supply/demand of formulary oncology drugs to detect treatment patterns, estimate needs, expedite procurement, and prevent shortages/delays. Furthermore, the panel discussed the needs to define value concerning cancer treatment in Qatar, implement value-based models for reimbursement decision-making such as health technology assessment and multiple-criteria decision analysis, and promote patient education and involvement/feedback in developing and implementing cancer management guidelines. CONCLUSION: Herein, we summarize the first Q-OHEP consensus recommendations, which aim to provide a solid basis for evaluating, registering, and approving new cancer medications to accelerate patient access to novel cancer treatments in Qatar; promote/facilitate the adoption and collection of patient-reported outcomes; and implement value-based cancer care in Qatar.

A comparison of international modelling methods to evaluate health economics of colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is becoming an increasing health problem worldwide. However, with the help of screening, early diagnosis can reduce incidence and mortality rates. To elevate the economic burden that CRC can cause, cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) can assist healthcare systems to make screening programmes more cost-effective and prolong survival for early-stage CRC patients. This review aims to identify different CEA modelling methods used internationally to evaluate health economics of CRC screening. METHODS: This review will systematically search electronic databases which include MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Scopus. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidance recommendations will design the review, and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement will be used to extract relevant data from studies retrieved. Two reviewers will screen through the evidence using the PICOS (Participant, Intervention, Comparators, Outcomes, Study Design) framework, with a third reviewer to settle any disagreements. Once data extraction and quality assessment are complete, the results will be presented qualitatively and tabulated using the CHEERS checklist. DISCUSSION: The results obtained from the systematic review will highlight how different CRC screening programmes around the world utilise and incorporate health economic modelling methods to be more cost-effective. This information can help modellers develop CEA models which can be adapted to suit the specific screening programmes that they are evaluating. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022296113.

Análisis de costos de la atención hospitalaria en un paciente con fibrilación auricular no valvular y accidente cerebrovascular a repetición / Cost analysis of in hospital attention in a non-valvular atrial fibrillation patient and recurrent stroke

RESUMEN INTRODUCCIÓN: Paciente de 71 años con diagnóstico de fibrilación auricular y ataques cerebrovasculares recurrentes, tratada con varios anticoagulantes. El costo del tratamiento del ictus en Colombia para el año 2008 fue de $450.000 millones de pesos colombianos. OBJETIVO: Estimar el costo hospitalario de la atención de un paciente con ictus a repetición secundario a fibrilación auricular. MÉTODOS: Estudio económico parcial de microcosteo de la atención intrahospitalaria para un caso de espectro severo recurrente, que no necesariamente refleja el caso promedio. El consumo de recursos se valoró mediante el uso de tarifas de referencia nacionales. Los resultados se presentan en precios actuales del 2019 (peso colombiano y dólar americano). RESULTADOS: Paciente con 3 eventos hospitalarios, que estuvo 31 días hospitalizada. Las hospitalizaciones tuvieron unos costos de: $53.883.490 (USD 16.141,1), $6.343.096 (USD 1.900,1) y $15.719.443 (USD 4.708,9) respectivamente, con un precio promedio por cada hospitalización de $25.315.343 (USD 7.583,4), costo total de $75.946.029 (USD 22.750,1) costo día de $2.449.872 (USD 729,5). El rubro que aumentó consistentemente los costos fueron los procedimientos (35,7 %). CONCLUSIONES: El ictus recurrente causado por fibrilación auricular no valvular se asocia con un incremento significativo de los costos directos, con un impacto de casi dos veces el PIB per cápita. Un diagnóstico oportuno y una selección adecuada pueden reducirlo.

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION: A 71-year-old patient with a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation and recurrent strokes, treated with various anticoagulants, the stroke treatment in Colombia for 2008 was $ 450 billion Colombian pesos. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the hospital cost of caring for a patient with recurrent stroke secondary to atrial fibrillation. METHODS: Partial economic study of micro costing of in-hospital care for a case of recurrent severe spectrum stroke, which does not necessarily reflect the average case. Resource consumption was valued using national reference rates. The results are presented in current 2019 prices (Colombian pesos and US dollars). RESULTS: Patient with 3 hospital events, who was hospitalized for 31 days. Hospitalizations had costs of $ 53,883,490 (USD 16,141.1), $ 6,343,096 (USD 1,900.1) and $ 15,719,443 (USD 4,708.9) respectively, with an average price for each hospitalization of $ 25,315,343 (USD 7,583.4), total cost of $ 75,946,029 (USD 22,750.1) daily cost of $ 2,449,872 (USD 729.5). The item that consistently increased costs was procedures (35.7 %). CONCLUSIONS: Recurrent stroke caused by nonvalvular atrial fibrillation is associated with a significant increase in direct costs, with an impact of almost twice the GDP per capita. A timely diagnosis and proper selection can reduce it.

Enhancing Health Equity Through Cancer Health Economics Research.

Cancer displays some of the largest health-equity concerns of all diseases. This paper draws attention to how health economics research can assess strategies to reduce or even eliminate health disparities and provides pivotal examples of existing research as well as areas for future contributions. The paper also highlights critical data limitations that currently restrain the impact health economics research could have. We then explore new areas of inquiry where economic research is sparse but could have an important impact on health equity, particularly in topics involving Medicare and Medicaid policies that expand reimbursement and generosity of coverage. Health economics studies are notably absent from policies and practices surrounding clinical trials, representing an opportunity for future research. We urge health economics researchers to consider experiments, interventions, and assessments through primary data collection; we further encourage the formulation of multidisciplinary teams to ensure that health economics skills are well melded with other areas of expertise. These teams are needed to maximize novelty and rigor of evidence. As policies are promulgated to address disparities in cancer, involvement of economics in a multidisciplinary context can help ensure that these policies do not have unintended impacts that may deepen inequities.

Health Economics Research in Cancer Treatment: Current Challenges and Future Directions.

The National Cancer Institute Division of Cancer Control and Population Science hosted a virtual conference on the Future of Cancer Health Economics Research and included a presentation from a workgroup that considered current challenges and future directions in health economics research centered on cancer treatment. The workgroup identified 3 broad categories of focus: data limitations, opportunities for training for clinicians and health economists interested in collaboration, and the need for prospective economic study of cancer treatment. Within these areas of focus, the workgroup recommended the following: improvement of the availability of key economic measures in data available to researchers, creation of more comprehensive datasets robust to insurance type or coverage, development of cancer care health economics research-focused symposia, instituting clear mechanisms to support integration of economic analyses alongside clinical trials, development of standardized methods to measure the cost of cancer care to health-care systems and patients, and development of standardized evaluations that include measures of social determinants of health.

Health Economics Research in Cancer Screening: Research Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions.

Cancer screening has long been considered a worthy public health investment. Health economics offers the theoretical foundation and research methodology to understand the demand- and supply-side factors associated with screening and evaluate screening-related policies and interventions. This article provides an overview of health economic theories and methods related to cancer screening and discusses opportunities for future research. We review 2 academic disciplines most relevant to health economics research in cancer screening: applied microeconomics and decision science. We consider 3 emerging topics: cancer screening policies in national as well as local contexts, "choosing wisely" screening practices, and targeted screening efforts for vulnerable subpopulations. We also discuss the strengths and weaknesses of available data sources and opportunities for methodological research and training. Recommendations to strengthen research infrastructure include developing novel data linkage strategies, increasing access to electronic health records, establishing curriculum and training programs, promoting multidisciplinary collaborations, and enhancing research funding opportunities.

Introduction to the Supplement: Is Now the Time for the Future of Cancer Economics Research?

The National Cancer Institute's Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences hosted a virtual conference, The Future of Cancer Health Economics Research, in December 2020. This conference brought together a multidisciplinary group of researchers and other stakeholders interested in supporting and developing the field of cancer health economics research to help improve both patient outcomes and health-care systems. The introduction to the supplement describes the origins and planning for the conference and the conference sessions and presentations. The papers included in this supplement, arising from the conference sessions, help strengthened our understanding of what is cancer health economics research and how this field can provide even greater contributions in the future.

Research on the Economics of Cancer-Related Health Care: An Overview of the Review Literature.

We reviewed current literature reviews regarding economics of cancer-related health care to identify focus areas and gaps. We searched PubMed for systematic and other reviews with the Medical Subject Headings "neoplasms" and "economics" published between January 1, 2010, and April 1, 2020, identifying 164 reviews. Review characteristics were abstracted and described. The majority (70.7%) of reviews focused on cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analyses. Few reviews addressed other types of cancer health economic studies. More than two-thirds of the reviews examined cancer treatments, followed by screening (15.9%) and survivorship or end-of-life (13.4%). The plurality of reviews (28.7%) cut across cancer site, followed by breast (20.7%), colorectal (11.6%), and gynecologic (8.5%) cancers. Specific topics addressed cancer screening modalities, novel therapies, pain management, or exercise interventions during survivorship. The results indicate that reviews do not regularly cover other phases of care or topics including financial hardship, policy, and measurement and methods.

Methods and Study Design for Cancer Health Economics Research: Summary of Discussions From a Breakout Session.

The legitimacy of findings from cancer health economics research depends on study design and methods. A breakout session, Methods and Study Design for Cancer Health Economics Research, was convened at the Future of Cancer Health Economics Research Conference to discuss 2 commonly used analytic tools for cancer health economics research: observational studies and decision-analytic modeling. Observational studies include analysis of data collected with the primary purpose of supporting economic evaluation or secondary use of data collected for another purpose. Modeling studies develop a parametrized structure, such as a decision tree, to estimate hypothetical impact. Whereas observational studies focus on what has happened and why, modeling studies address what may happen. We summarize the discussion at this breakout session, focusing on 3 key elements of high-quality cancer health economics research: study design, analytical methods, and addressing uncertainty.

Health Economics Research in Primary Prevention of Cancer: Assessment, Current Challenges, and Future Directions.

In the past 2 decades, the demand for information on health economics research to guide health care decision making has substantially increased. Studies have provided evidence that eliminating or reducing tobacco use; eating a healthy diet, including fruit and vegetables; being physically active; reducing alcohol consumption; avoiding ultraviolet radiation; and minimizing exposure to environmental and occupational carcinogenic agents should substantially reduce cancer incidence in the population. The benefits of these primary prevention measures in reducing cancer incidence are not instantaneous. Therefore, health economics research has an important role to play in providing credible information to decision makers on the health and economic benefits of primary prevention. This article provides an overview of health economics research related to primary prevention of cancer. We addressed the following questions: 1) What are the gaps and unmet needs for performing health economics research focused on primary prevention of cancer? 2) What are the challenges and opportunities to conducting health economics research to evaluate primary prevention of cancer? and 3) What are the future directions for enhancing health economics research on primary prevention of cancer? Modeling primary prevention of cancer is often difficult given data limitations, long delays before the policy or intervention is effective, possible unintended effects of the policy or intervention, and the necessity of outside expertise to understand key inputs or outputs to the modeling. Despite these challenges, health economics research has an important role to play in providing credible information to decision makers on the health and economic benefits of primary prevention of cancer.

Communicating Research to Non-Researcher Audiences: A Panel Discussion From the National Cancer Institute's Future of Cancer Health Economics Research Conference.

With rising health-care costs and increasing patient financial strain, health economics research has never been more relevant to the lay public. This manuscript summarizes the discussion from the "Communicating Health Economics Research to Non-Researcher Audiences" expert panel and highlights the foundations of good health/science communication, distilling your work into a newsworthy headline, and communication concerns in specific scenarios. It also provides "dos and don'ts" for promoting your research to the news media and a list of resources on interacting with the press for further study.

New Data Resources, Linkages, and Infrastructure for Cancer Health Economics Research: Main Topics From a Panel Discussion.

Although a broad range of data resources have played a key role in the substantial achievements of cancer health economics research, there are now needs for more comprehensive data that represent a fuller picture of the cancer care experience. In particular, researchers need information that represents more diverse populations; includes more clinical details; and provides greater context on individual- and neighborhood-level factors that can affect cancer prevention, screening, treatment, and survivorship, including measures of financial health or toxicity, health-related social needs, and social determinants of health. This article highlights 3 critical topics for cancer health economics research: the future of the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services-linked data resources; use of social media data for cancer outcomes research; and multi-site-linked electronic health record data networks. These 3 topics represent different approaches to enhance data resources, linkages, and infrastructures and are complementary strategies to provide more complete information on activities involved in and factors affecting the cancer control continuum. These and other data resources will assist researchers in examining the complex and nuanced questions now at the forefront of cancer health economics research.

Fostering Transdisciplinary Collaborations in Cancer Health Economics Research.

Health economics research, defined as research that evaluates how patients, health-care providers, and governments make health-care decisions using economic theory, models, and empirical techniques, requires broad domains of knowledge that are not fully encompassed by a single discipline. Collaboration between disciplines provides different perspectives on problems, creates more comprehensive research questions, allows for more complex understanding of multifaceted determinants and processes, and thus, provides more realistic recommendations to address difficult questions of health economics. Realizing the importance of collaboration, the National Cancer Institute virtual conference on the Future of Cancer Health Economics included an interactive panel exploring how to foster effective collaborations in cancer health economics research. This manuscript summarizes the panel and participants' discussion regarding the value, barriers, and potential facilitators to transdisciplinary collaboration within health economics research.