Bias associated with failing to incorporate dependence on event history in Markov models.
OBJECTIVE
When using state-transition Markov models to simulate risk of recurrent events over time, incorporating dependence on higher numbers of prior episodes can increase model complexity, yet failing to capture this event history may bias model outcomes. This analysis assessed the tradeoffs between model bias and complexity when evaluating risks of recurrent events in Markov models.


METHODS
The authors developed a generic episode/relapse Markov cohort model, defining bias as the percentage change in events prevented with 2 hypothetical interventions (prevention and treatment) when incorporating 0 to 9 prior episodes in relapse risk versus a model with 10 such episodes. Magnitude and sign of bias were evaluated as a function of event and recovery risks, disease-specific mortality, and risk function.


RESULTS
Bias was positive in the base case for a prevention strategy, indicating that failing to fully incorporate dependence on event history overestimated the prevention's predicted impact. For treatment, the bias was negative, indicating an underestimated benefit. Bias approached zero as the number of tracked prior episodes increased, and the average bias over 10 tracked episodes was greater with the exponential compared with linear functions of relapse risk and with treatment compared with prevention strategies. With linear and exponential risk functions, absolute bias reached 33% and 78%, respectively, in prevention and 52% and 85% in treatment.


CONCLUSIONS
Failing to incorporate dependence on prior event history in subsequent relapse risk in Markov models can greatly affect model outcomes, overestimating the impact of prevention and treatment strategies by up to 85% and underestimating the impact in some treatment models by up to 20%. When at least 4 prior episodes are incorporated, bias does not exceed 26% in prevention or 11% in treatment.
Bentley
Tanya G K
TG
RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA. tbentley@pharllc.com
Kuntz
Karen M
KM
Ringel
Jeanne S
JS
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D015982:Bias; D002648:Child; D015331:Cohort Studies; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003657:Decision Making; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008390:Markov Chains; D008875:Middle Aged; D018803:Models, Economic; D015233:Models, Statistical; D009026:Mortality / Q000639:trends; D012008:Recurrence; D018570:Risk Assessment / Q000379:methods*; D014481:United States; D055815:Young Adult
Clin Psychol Rev. 1998 Nov;18(7):765-94
9827321
Med Decis Making. 2009 Sep-Oct;29(5):549-56
19596867
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1989 Feb;79(2):163-78
2784251
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1994 Jul-Aug;33(6):809-18
7598758
Med Decis Making. 2003 Sep-Oct;23(5):379-96
14570296
Eur Addict Res. 1998 Mar;4(1-2):58-66
9740818
Am J Psychiatry. 2000 Oct;157(10):1584-91
11007711
Ann Intern Med. 2001 Mar 6;134(5):345-60
11242495
J Abnorm Psychol. 1993 Feb;102(1):133-44
8436689
J Abnorm Psychol. 1989 May;98(2):107-16
2708651
Bipolar Disord. 2000 Sep;2(3 Pt 2):281-93
11249806
Med Decis Making. 2002 May-Jun;22(3):218-27
12058779
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1999 Jan;38(1):56-63
9893417
J Abnorm Psychol. 1993 Feb;102(1):110-20
8436687
Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2004 Feb 18;52(14):1-38
15008552