You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The CEAC as implemented in DAMPACK calculates the probability an intervention is preferred (or considered optimal), not the probability the intervention is cost-effective. Multiple interventions can be cost-effective (not dominated and ICER<WTP) but only one can be preferred (maximize NMB or NHB, or equivalently, have the largest ICER below WTP threshold).
The CEAC as implemented in DAMPACK calculates the probability an intervention is preferred (or considered optimal), not the probability the intervention is cost-effective. Multiple interventions can be cost-effective (not dominated and ICER<WTP) but only one can be preferred (maximize NMB or NHB, or equivalently, have the largest ICER below WTP threshold).
Here is an example of a CEAC where the Y axis is appropriately called "Probability cost-effective". Note that unlike the DAMPACK implementation, the sum of the probability each strategy is cost-effective at any given sums to a number greater than one, particularly for larger willingness-to-pay thresholids.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306025962/figure/fig2/AS:393531618283544@1470836657983/Cost-effectiveness-acceptability-curves.png
I suggest changing the Y axis in the DAMPACK ceac plot to "Pr Preferred" or "Pr Most Cost-Effective"
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: