IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v40y2020i5p693-709.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methods for Model Calibration under High Uncertainty: Modeling Cholera in Bangladesh

Author

Listed:
  • Theresa Ryckman

    (Center for Health Policy and Center for Primary Care & Outcomes Research, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA)

  • Stephen Luby

    (Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA)

  • Douglas K. Owens

    (VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Palo Alto, CA, USA
    Center for Health Policy and Center for Primary Care & Outcomes Research, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA)

  • Eran Bendavid

    (Division of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
    Center for Health Policy and Center for Primary Care & Outcomes Research, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA)

  • Jeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert

    (Center for Health Policy and Center for Primary Care & Outcomes Research, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA)

Abstract

Background. Published data on a disease do not always correspond directly to the parameters needed to simulate natural history. Several calibration methods have been applied to computer-based disease models to extract needed parameters that make a model’s output consistent with available data. Objective. To assess 3 calibration methods and evaluate their performance in a real-world application. Methods. We calibrated a model of cholera natural history in Bangladesh, where a lack of active surveillance biases available data. We built a cohort state-transition cholera natural history model that includes case hospitalization to reflect the passive surveillance data-generating process. We applied 3 calibration techniques: incremental mixture importance sampling, sampling importance resampling, and random search with rejection sampling. We adapted these techniques to the context of wide prior uncertainty and many degrees of freedom. We evaluated the resulting posterior parameter distributions using a range of metrics and compared predicted cholera burden estimates. Results. All 3 calibration techniques produced posterior distributions with a higher likelihood and better fit to calibration targets as compared with prior distributions. Incremental mixture importance sampling resulted in the highest likelihood and largest number of unique parameter sets to better inform joint parameter uncertainty. Compared with naïve uncalibrated parameter sets, calibrated models of cholera in Bangladesh project substantially more cases, many of which are not detected by passive surveillance, and fewer deaths. Limitations. Calibration cannot completely overcome poor data quality, which can leave some parameters less well informed than others. Calibration techniques may perform differently under different circumstances. Conclusions . Incremental mixture importance sampling, when adapted to the context of high uncertainty, performs well. By accounting for biases in data, calibration can improve model projections of disease burden.

Suggested Citation

  • Theresa Ryckman & Stephen Luby & Douglas K. Owens & Eran Bendavid & Jeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert, 2020. "Methods for Model Calibration under High Uncertainty: Modeling Cholera in Bangladesh," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 40(5), pages 693-709, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:40:y:2020:i:5:p:693-709
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X20938683
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X20938683
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X20938683?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. Dobromir T Dimitrov & Christopher Troeger & M Elizabeth Halloran & Ira M Longini & Dennis L Chao, 2014. "Comparative Effectiveness of Different Strategies of Oral Cholera Vaccination in Bangladesh: A Modeling Study," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-8, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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.

      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:40:y:2020:i:5:p:693-709. 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.