Decision science and cervical cancer.

作者: Scott B. Cantor , Marianne C. Fahs , Jeanne S. Mandelblatt , Evan R. Myers , Gillian D. Sanders

DOI: 10.1002/CNCR.11680

关键词:

摘要: Mathematical modeling is an effective tool for guiding cervical cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment decisions patients policymakers. This article describes the use of mathematical as outlined in five presentations from Decision Science Cervical Cancer session Second International Conference on held at The University Texas M. D. Anderson Center, April 11-14, 2002. authors provide overview modeling, especially decision analysis cost-effectiveness analysis, examples how it can be used clinical making regarding prevention, cancer. Included are applications well theory science answer such questions optimal frequency age to stop way diagnose Results one model demonstrated that a vaccine against high-risk strains human papillomavirus was cost-effective resources, discussion another importance collecting direct non-health care costs time analysis. Research presented indicated must taken when applying results population-wide, analyses reduce health disparities. encompass variety theoretical applied issues ultimate objective using decision-analytic models identify ways improve women's economically reasonable cost.

参考文章(19)
A. Laupacis, D. Feeny, P. X. Tugwell, A. S. Detsky, How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations Canadian Medical Association Journal. ,vol. 146, pp. 473- 481 ,(1992)
Gillian D. Sanders, Al V. Taira, Cost Effectiveness of a Potential Vaccine for Human papillomavirus Emerging Infectious Diseases. ,vol. 9, pp. 37- 48 ,(2003) , 10.3201/EID0901.020168
Jeanne S Mandelblatt, William F Lawrence, Sharita Mizell Womack, Denise Jacobson, Bin Yi, Yi-ting Hwang, Karen Gold, James Barter, Keerti Shah, Benefits and Costs of Using HPV Testing to Screen for Cervical Cancer JAMA. ,vol. 287, pp. 2372- 2381 ,(2002) , 10.1001/JAMA.287.18.2372
Scott B Cantor, Michele Follen Mitchell, Guillermo Tortolero-Luna, Charlotte S Bratka, Diane C Bodurka, Rebecca Richards-Kortum, Cost-effectiveness analysis of diagnosis and management of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions. Obstetrics & Gynecology. ,vol. 91, pp. 270- 277 ,(1998) , 10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00623-6
Marianne C. Fahs, Stacey B. Plichta, Jeanne S. Mandelblatt, Cost-effective policies for cervical cancer screening. An international review. PharmacoEconomics. ,vol. 9, pp. 211- 230 ,(1996) , 10.2165/00019053-199609030-00004
Joanna E. Siegel, Recommendations for Reporting Cost-effectiveness Analyses JAMA. ,vol. 276, pp. 1339- 1341 ,(1996) , 10.1001/JAMA.1996.03540160061034
Jane J Kim, Thomas C Wright, Sue J Goldie, None, Cost-effectiveness of alternative triage strategies for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. JAMA. ,vol. 287, pp. 2382- 2390 ,(2002) , 10.1001/JAMA.287.18.2382
David M. Eddy, Screening for Cervical Cancer Annals of Internal Medicine. ,vol. 113, pp. 214- 226 ,(1990) , 10.7326/0003-4819-113-3-214
J. E. Siegel, Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. ,vol. 276, pp. 1339- 1341 ,(1996) , 10.1001/JAMA.276.16.1339