IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v29y2009i1p104-115.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Multiattribute Model for Evaluating the Benefit-Risk Profiles of Treatment Alternatives

Author

Listed:
  • James C. Felli

    (Eli Lilly & Company, Indianapolis, IN, felli_james_c@lilly.com)

  • Rebecca A. Noel

    (Eli Lilly & Company, Indianapolis, IN)

  • Patrizia A. Cavazzoni

    (Eli Lilly & Company, Indianapolis, IN)

Abstract

The assessment of the benefits and risks associated with a medicine's use requires careful consideration of a wealth of information of varying format and quality, ranging from efficacy and safety data derived from randomized clinical trials to statistical results from health outcomes studies to spontaneously reported adverse events. Contrary to the expectations of patients, physicians, and regulators, the literature offers little guidance as to how to strike an appropriate balance between benefit and risk. Although a qualitative listing of a medicine's benefits and risks is useful, much could be gained from a systematic and transparent process to evaluate a medicine's pre- and postmarketing performance. The authors propose a representational model based on multicriteria decision analysis that can incorporate both evaluative judgments from different perspectives (e.g., physician, patient) and quantitative data to inform tradeoffs between multiple benefit and multiple risk elements in a logically consistent and transparent manner. The model is designed to highlight the relative merits and deficits of treatment alternatives in well-defined and specific contexts. It is intended to serve as a common platform to facilitate focused benefit-risk tradeoff discussions between scientists, physicians, regulatory authorities, and pharmaceutical companies, and to assist in the communication of clear and consistent messages regarding those tradeoffs.

Suggested Citation

  • James C. Felli & Rebecca A. Noel & Patrizia A. Cavazzoni, 2009. "A Multiattribute Model for Evaluating the Benefit-Risk Profiles of Treatment Alternatives," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 29(1), pages 104-115, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:29:y:2009:i:1:p:104-115
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08323299
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X08323299
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X08323299?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lynn A. Maguire, 2004. "What Can Decision Analysis Do for Invasive Species Management?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 859-868, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mónica D. Oliveira & Inês Mataloto & Panos Kanavos, 2019. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 891-918, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vicki Bier, 2020. "The Role of Decision Analysis in Risk Analysis: A Retrospective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2207-2217, November.
    2. David C. Cook & Shuang Liu & Brendan Murphy & W. Mark Lonsdale, 2010. "Adaptive Approaches to Biosecurity Governance," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(9), pages 1303-1314, September.
    3. Andrew M. Deines & Valerie C. Chen & Wayne G. Landis, 2005. "Modeling the Risks of Nonindigenous Species Introductions Using a Patch‐Dynamics Approach Incorporating Contaminant Effects as a Disturbance," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1637-1651, December.
    4. Iftikhar U. Sikder & Sanchita Mal‐Sarkar & Tarun K. Mal, 2006. "Knowledge‐Based Risk Assessment Under Uncertainty for Species Invasion," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 239-252, February.
    5. Rogers, Abbie A. & Burton, Michael P. & Cleland, Jonelle A. & Rolfe, John C. & Meeuwig, Jessica J. & Pannell, David J., 2020. "Expert judgements and community values: preference heterogeneity for protecting river ecology in Western Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(2), April.
    6. Roberts, Michaela & Cresswell, Will & Hanley, Nick, 2018. "Prioritising Invasive Species Control Actions: Evaluating Effectiveness, Costs, Willingness to Pay and Social Acceptance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 1-8.
    7. Terry Walshe & Mark Burgman, 2010. "A Framework for Assessing and Managing Risks Posed by Emerging Diseases," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 236-249, February.
    8. Robin Gregory & Graham Long, 2009. "Using Structured Decision Making to Help Implement a Precautionary Approach to Endangered Species Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 518-532, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:29:y:2009:i:1:p:104-115. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.