Money should be spent on research that promises the most value for the dollar, but how does one estimate the value of research? This paper suggests a logical and quantitative approach for estimating the dollar value of a class of proposed road safety research projects that aim to estimate the safety effects of various actions. The purpose of such research is to improve the ability to predict the safety effects of future actions because more accurate predictions would result in fewer incorrect decisions. With more correct decisions, investment is more cost-effective. This final outcome is what gives such research its value. The task of assigning a dollar value to proposed research is doable. The logic and the computations are described. The estimated dollar value, when coupled with the cost of research, can be used to prioritize proposed research projects.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SchlaiferR.Probability and Statistics for Business Decisions: An Introduction to Managerial Economics Under Uncertainty.McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959.
2.
HowardR. A.Information Value Theory.IEEE Transactions on Systems, Science, and Cybernetics, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1966, pp. 22–26.
3.
WinklerR. L.An Introduction to Bayesian Inference and Decision.Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York, 1972.
4.
BergerJ. O.Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis, 2nd ed. Springer Series in Statistics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1985.
5.
PrattJ.W., RaiffaH., and SchlaiferR.. Introduction to Statistical Decision Theory.MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1995.
6.
RaiffaH., and SchlaiferR.. Applied Statistical Decision Theory.Wiley Classics Library Series. Wiley-Interscience, New York, 2000.
7.
ParmigianiG.Modeling in Medical Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach.Statistics in Practice Series. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Chichester, United Kingdom, 2002.
8.
HammittJ.K., and CaveJ. A. K.. Research Planning for Food Safety: A Value of Information Approach.Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, 1995.
9.
MeltzerD.Addressing Uncertainty in Medical Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Implications of Expected Utility Maximization for Methods to Perform Sensitivity Analysis and the Use of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Set Priorities for Medical Research.Journal of Health Economics, Vol. 20, No. 1, 2001, pp. 109–129.
10.
Institute of Medicine.Scientific Opportunities and Public Needs: Improving Priority Setting and Public Input at NIH.National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1998.
11.
FleurenceR.L., and TorgersonD. J.Setting Priorities for Research.Health Policy, Vol. 69, No. 1, 2004, pp. 1–10
12.
MeltzerD.O., BasuY., and MeltzerH. Y. Comparative Effectiveness Research for Antipsychotic Medications: How Much Is Enough? Health Affairs (Millwood), Vol. 28, No. 5, 2009, pp. w794–w808.
13.
ClaxtonK.P., and SculpherM. J.Using Value of Information Analysis to Prioritise Health Research: Some Lessons from Recent UK Experience.PharmacoEconomics, Vol. 24, No. 11, 2006, pp. 1055–1068.
14.
HauerE., and GevaI.. A Decision Analytic Approach to the Design of Experiments in Research on Traffic Safety. In Transport Risk Assessment (YagarS., ed.), University of Waterloo Press, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 1984.
15.
ThompsonK.M., and GrahamJ. D.Going Beyond the Single Number: Using Probabilistic Risk Assessment to Improve Risk Management.Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1996, pp. 1008–1034.
16.
ClaxtonK.P., and PosnettJ.. An Economic Approach to Clinical Trial Design and Research Priority Setting.Health Economics, Vol. 5, No. 6, 1996, pp. 513–524.
17.
ClaxtonK. P.The Irrelevance of Inference: A Decision-Making Approach to the Stochastic Evaluation of Health Care Technologies.Journal of Health Economics, Vol. 18, No. 3, 1999, pp. 341–364.
18.
YokotaF., and ThompsonK.. Value of Information Literature Analysis: A Review of Applications in Health Risk Management.Medical Decision Making, Vol. 24, No. 3, 2004, pp. 287–298.
19.
BriggsA., ClaxtonK.P., and SculpherM. J.Decision Analytic Modelling for the Evaluation of Health Technologies.Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2006.
20.
PhilipsZ., ClaxtonK.P., PalmerS.J., and SculpherM. J.Priority Setting for Research in Health Care: An Application of Value of Information Analysis to Glycoprotein IIB/IIIA Antagonists in Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome.International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Vol. 22, No. 3, 2006, pp. 379–387.
21.
ColbournT.E., AsseburgC., BojkeL., PhilipsZ., WeltonN.J., ClaxtonK.P., AdesA.E., and GilbertR. E.Preventive Strategies for Group b Streptococcal and Other Bacterial Infections in Early Infancy: Cost Effectiveness and Value of Information Analyses.British Medical Journal, Vol. 335, No. 7621, 2007, p. 655.
22.
BojkeL., ClaxtonK., SculpherM.J., and PalmerS.. Identifying Research Priorities: The Value of Information Associated with Repeat Screening for Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Medical Decision Making, Vol. 28, No. 1, 2008, pp. 33–43.
23.
AdesA.E., LuG., and ClaxtonK. P.Expected Value of Sample Information Calculations in Medical Decision Modeling.Medical Decision Making, Vol. 24, No. 2, 2004, pp. 207–227.
24.
BrennanA., and KharroubiS. A.Efficient Computation of Partial Expected Value of Sample Information Using Bayesian Approximation.Journal of Health Economics, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2007, pp. 122–148.
25.
WillanA.R., and PintoE. M.The Value of Information and Optimal Clinical Trial Design.Statistics in Medicine, Vol. 24, No. 12, 2005, pp. 1791–1806.
26.
HauerE., BonnesonJ.A., CouncilF., SrinivasanR., and ZegeerC.. Crash Modification Factors: Foundational Issues. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2279, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2012, pp. 67–74.
27.
HauerE. Estimating the Mean and Variance of CMFs and How They Can Be Changed by New Research. Second report. Highway Safety Research Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 2011.
28.
NCHRP. Development of a Strategic National Highway Infrastructure Safety Research Agenda. In Task 1 report for NCHRP Project 17–48. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2011.
