Use of Simulation Modeling to Inform Decision Making for Health Care Systems and Policy in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Protocol for a Systematic Review

A competency framework on simulation modelling-supported decision-making for Master of Public Health graduates

BACKGROUND

Simulation models are increasingly important for supporting decision-making in public health. However, due to lack of training, many public health professionals remain unfamiliar with constructing simulation models and using their outputs for decision-making. This study contributes to filling this gap by developing a competency framework on simulation model-supported decision-making targeting Master of Public Health education.

METHODS

The study combined a literature review, a two-stage online Delphi survey and an online consensus workshop. A draft competency framework was developed based on 28 peer-reviewed publications. A two-stage online Delphi survey involving 15 experts was conducted to refine the framework. Finally, an online consensus workshop, including six experts, evaluated the competency framework and discussed its implementation.

RESULTS

The competency framework identified 20 competencies related to stakeholder engagement, problem definition, evidence identification, participatory system mapping, model creation and calibration and the interpretation and dissemination of model results. The expert evaluation recommended differentiating professional profiles and levels of expertise and synergizing with existing course contents to support its implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The competency framework developed in this study is instrumental to including simulation model-supported decision-making in public health training. Future research is required to differentiate expertise levels and develop implementation strategies.

Engaging stakeholders in the use of an interactive simulation tool to support decision-making about the implementation of colorectal cancer screening interventions

PURPOSE

We aimed to understand how an interactive, web-based simulation tool can be optimized to support decision-making about the implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for improving colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with decision-makers, including health administrators, advocates, and researchers, with a strong foundation in CRC prevention. Following a demonstration of the microsimulation modeling tool, participants reflected on the tool's potential impact for informing the selection and implementation of strategies for improving CRC screening and outcomes. The interviews assessed participants' preferences regarding the tool's design and content, comprehension of the model results, and recommendations for improving the tool.

RESULTS

Seventeen decision-makers completed interviews. Themes regarding the tool's utility included building a case for EBI implementation, selecting EBIs to adopt, setting implementation goals, and understanding the evidence base. Reported barriers to guiding EBI implementation included the tool being too research-focused, contextual differences between the simulated and local contexts, and lack of specificity regarding the design of simulated EBIs. Recommendations to address these challenges included making the data more actionable, allowing users to enter their own model inputs, and providing a how-to guide for implementing the simulated EBIs.

CONCLUSION

Diverse decision-makers found the simulation tool to be most useful for supporting early implementation phases, especially deciding which EBI(s) to implement. To increase the tool's utility, providing detailed guidance on how to implement the selected EBIs, and the extent to which users can expect similar CRC screening gains in their contexts, should be prioritized.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant health problem with an increasing incidence worldwide. Screening is one of the ways, in which cases and deaths of CRC can be prevented. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the different CRC screening techniques and to specify the efficient technique from a cost-effectiveness perspective.

METHODS

The economic studies of CRC screening in general populations (average risk), aged 50 years and above were reviewed. Two reviewers independently reviewed the titles, abstracts, and full-texts of the studies in five databases: Cochrane, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed. The disagreements between reviewers were resolved through the authors' consensus. The main outcome measures in this systematic review were the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of screening versus no-screening and then in comparison with other screening techniques. The ICER is defined by the difference in cost between two possible interventions, divided by the difference in their effect.

RESULTS

Eight studies were identified and retained for the final analysis. In this study, when screening techniques were compared to no-screening, all CRC screening techniques showed to be cost-effective. The lowest ICER calculated was $PPP -16265/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) (the negative ICERs were between purchasing power parity in US dollar ($PPP) -16265/QALY to $PPP -1988/QALY, whereas the positive ICERs were between $PPP 1257/QALY to $PPP 55987/QALY). For studies comparing various screening techniques, there was great heterogeneity in terms of the structures of the analyses, leading to diverse conclusions about their incremental cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

All CRC screening techniques were cost-effective, compared with the no-screening methods. The cost-effectiveness of the various screening techniques mainly was dependent on the context-specific parameters and highly affected by the framework of the cost-effectiveness analysis. In order to make the studies comparable, it is important to adopt a reference-based methodology for economic evaluation studies.