Decision models can combine information from different sources to simulate the long-term consequences of alternative strategies in the presence of uncertainty. A cohort state-transition model (cSTM) is a decision model commonly used in medical decision making to simulate the transitions of a hypothetical cohort among various health states over time. This tutorial focuses on time-independent cSTM, in which transition probabilities among health states remain constant over time. We implement time-independent cSTM in R, an open-source mathematical and statistical programming language. We illustrate time-independent cSTMs using a previously published decision model, calculate costs and effectiveness outcomes, and conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of multiple strategies, including a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. We provide open-source code in R to facilitate wider adoption. In a second, more advanced tutorial, we illustrate time-dependent cSTMs.
KuntzKMRussellLBOwensDKSandersGDTrikalinosTASalomonJA. Decision models in cost-effectiveness analysis. In: NeumannPJSandersGDRussellLBSiegelJEGaniatsTG, eds. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2017. p. 105–36.
2.
SiebertUAlagozOBayoumiAM, et al. State-transition modeling: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-3. Med Decis Making. 2012;32(5):690–700.
3.
SuijkerbuijkAWMVan HoekAJKoopsenJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening for chronic hepatitis B and C among migrant populations in a low endemic country. PLoS One. 2018;13(11):1–6.
4.
SathianathenNJKonetyBRAlarid-EscuderoFLawrentschukNBoltonDMKuntzKM. Cost-effectiveness analysis of active surveillance strategies for men with low-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2019;75(6):910–7.
5.
LuSYuYFuSRenH. Cost-effectiveness of ALK testing and first-line crizotinib therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer in China. PLoS One. 2018;13(10):1–2.
6.
DjatcheLMVargaSLieberthalRD. Cost-effectiveness of aspirin adherence for secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. Pharmacoecon Open. 2018;2(4):371–80.
7.
Smith-SpanglerCMJuusolaJLEnnsEAOwensDKGarberAM. Population strategies to decrease sodium intake and the burden of cardiovascular disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152(8):481–7.
8.
PershingSEnnsEAMatesicBOwensDKGoldhaber-FiebertJD. Cost-effectiveness of treatment of diabetic macular edema. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(1):18–29.
9.
JalalHPechlivanoglouPKrijkampEAlarid-EscuderoFEnnsEAHuninkMGM. An overview of R in health decision sciences. Med Decis Making. 2017;37(7):735–46.
10.
SpedicatoGA. Discrete time Markov chains with R. The R Journal. 2017;9(2):84–104.
11.
Filipović-PierucciAZarcaKDurand-ZaleskiI. Markov models for health economic evaluation: the R Package heemod. arXiv:170203252v1. 2017;April:30. Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/1702.03252
12.
MillerDKHomanSM. Determining transition probabilities: confusion and suggestions. Med Decis Making. 1994;14(1):52–8.
13.
KuntzKMWeinsteinMC. Modelling in economic evaluation. In: DrummondMFMcGuireA eds. Economic Evaluation in Health Care: Merging Theory with Practice. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2001. p. 141–71.
14.
SonnenbergFABeckJR. Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide. Med Decis Making. 1993;13(4):322–38.
15.
BeckJRPaukerSG. The Markov process in medical prognosis. Med Decis Making. 1983;3(4):419–58.
16.
Alarid-EscuderoFKrijkampEEnnsEA, et al. A tutorial on time-dependent cohort state-transition models in R using a cost-effectiveness analysis exampleMed Decis Making. 2022; 43(1):21-41.
17.
IskandarR. A theoretical foundation of state-transition cohort models in health decision analysis. PLoS One. 2018;13(12):e0205543.
18.
EnnsEACiprianoLESimonsCTKongCY. Identifying best-fitting inputs in health-economic model calibration: a Pareto Frontier approach. Med Decis Making. 2015;35(2):170–82.
19.
KrijkampEMAlarid-EscuderoFEnnsEAJalalHJHuninkMGMPechlivanoglouP. Microsimulation modeling for health decision sciences using R: a tutorial. Med Decis Making. 2018;38(3):400–22.
20.
Alarid-EscuderoFKrijkampEPechlivanoglouP, et al. A need for change! A coding framework for improving transparency in decision modeling. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(11):1329–39.
21.
RosmalenJ vanToyMO’MahonyJF. A mathematical approach for evaluating Markov models in continuous time without discrete-event simulation. Med Decis Making. 2013;33(6):767–79.
22.
HuninkMGGMWeinsteinMCWittenbergE, et al. Decision Making in Health and Medicine. 2nd ed. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press; 2014.
23.
ElbashaEHChhatwalJ. Theoretical foundations and practical applications of within-cycle correction methods. Med Decis Making. 2016;36(1):115–31.
24.
ElbashaEHChhatwalJ. Myths and misconceptions of within-cycle correction: a guide for modelers and decision makers. Pharmacoeconomics. 2016;34(1):13–22.
BriggsAHWeinsteinMCFenwickEALKarnonJSculpherMJPaltielAD. Model parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force Working Group-6. Med Decis Making. 2012;32(5):722–32.
27.
ParmigianiGSamsaGPAncukiewiczMLipscombJHasselbladVMatcharDB. Assessing uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analyses: application to a complex decision model. Med Decis Making. 1997;17(4):390–401.
28.
ParmigianiG. Measuring uncertainty in complex decision analysis models. Stat Methods Med Res. 2002;11(6):513–37.
29.
BriggsAHGoereeRBlackhouseGO’BrienBJ. Probabilistic analysis of cost-effectiveness models: choosing between treatment strategies for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Med Decis Making. 2002;22(4):290–308.
30.
StinnettAAMullahyJ. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making. 1998;18(2):S68–80.
31.
Alarid-EscuderoFEnnsEAKuntzKMMichaudTLJalalH. “Time traveling is just too dangerous” but some methods are worth revisiting: the advantages of expected loss curves over cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and frontier. Value Health. 2019;22(5):611–8.
32.
Goldhaber-FiebertJDJalalHJ. Some health states are better than others: using health state rank order to improve probabilistic analyses. Med Decis Making. 2015;36(8):927–40.
33.
BriggsAHAdesAEPriceMJ. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for decision trees with multiple branches: use of the dirichlet distribution in a Bayesian framework. Med Decis Making. 2003;23(4):341–50.
34.
WickhamHTestingBryan J.. In: R Packages: Organize, Test, Document and Share Your Code. 2nd ed. Sebastopol (CA): O’Reilly Media; 2021. p. 1–3.
35.
GrimmettGWelshD. Markov chains. In: Probability: An Introduction. 2nd ed. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2014. p 203–3.
36.
AxlerSGehringFWRibetKA. Difference Equations. New York: Springer; 2005.
37.
CaoQBuskensEFeenstraTJaarsmaTHillegeHPostmusD. Continuous-time semi-markov models in health economic decision making: an illustrative example in heart failure disease management. Med Decis Making. 2016;36(1):59–71.
38.
BegunAIcksAWaldeyerRLandwehrSKochMGianiG. Identification of a multistate continuous-time nonhomogeneous Markov chain model for patients with decreased renal function. Med Decis Making. 2013;33(2):298–306.
39.
SoaresMOCantoECastroL. Continuous time simulation and discretized models for cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30(12):1101–17.
40.
FrederixGWJvan HasseltJGCSeverensJL, et al. Development of a framework for cohort simulation in cost-effectiveness analyses using a multistep ordinary differential equation solver algorithm in R. Med Decis Making. 2013;33(6):780–92.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
