Reproducing Johnson et al. 2021
  • Original study
  • Reproduction
    • README
    • Main analysis
  • Evaluation
    • Scope
    • Reproduction success
    • Journal badges
    • STARS framework
    • Reporting guidelines
  • Logbook
  • Summary
  • Reflections

On this page

  • Study
  • Computational reproducibility
  • Evaluation against guidelines
  • Edit this page
  • Report an issue

Summary report

For computational reproducibility assessment of Johnson et al. 2021

Study

Johnson, K.M., Sadatsafavi, M., Adibi, A., Lynd, L., Harrison, M., Tavakoli, H., Sin, D., Bryan, S. Cost Effectiveness of Case Detection Strategies for the Early Detection of COPD. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 19, p203-215 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-020-00616-2.

This study uses a previously validated discrete-event simulation model, EPIC: Evaluation Platform in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The model is written in C++ with an R interface, using R scripts for execution. The model is adapted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 16 COPD case detection strategies in primary care, comparing costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), and incremental net monetary benefits (INMB) across scenarios. Sensitivity analyses are also conducted.

Computational reproducibility

Successfully reproduced 4 out of 5 (80%) of items from the scope in 19h 49m (49.5%).

Required troubleshooting:

  • Environment - identifying required packages, importing archived packages, and local import of the epicR package
  • Run time - troubleshooting with lower agent numbers due to long run times
  • Output files - saves results to .csv
  • Tables and figures - writing code to produce these, which required figuring out:
    • Which results tables to use
    • Which columns to use
    • Which scenarios to use
    • How to transform the columns
    • How to create features like the efficiency frontier
  • Sensitivity analysis - identifying parameters to change and creating scripts
  • Table 3
  • Figure 3
  • Figure 4
  • Appendix 6
  • Appendix 7

Cannot display original figure as do not have permission for reuse, but can view at Johnson et al. (2021)

Reproduction:

Scenario Testing interval Costs per patient QALYs per patient ICER INMB (ranking)
0 S0: No case detection NaN $2150 12.545 NaN NaN
1 (S1a) CDQ ≥ 17 points 3 years $2439 12.560 19472.0 453(1)
2 (S1a) CDQ ≥ 17 points 5 years $2357 12.557 18717.0 346(2)
3 (S1b) Screening spirometry 3 years $2363 12.554 25644.0 202(4)
4 (S1b) Screening spirometry 5 years $2298 12.551 25236.0 146(8)
5 (S1c) CDQ + screening spirometry 3 years $2385 12.551 39678.0 61(13)
6 (S1c) CDQ + screening spirometry 5 years $2311 12.550 39400.0 43(15)
7 (S2a) Screening spirometry 3 years $2286 12.552 21002.0 188(5)
8 (S2a) Screening spirometry 5 years $2245 12.551 17109.0 182(6)
9 (S3a) CDQ ≥ 19.5 points 3 years $2234 12.548 34157.0 39(16)
10 (S3a) CDQ ≥ 19.5 points 5 years $2205 12.548 25648.0 52(14)
11 (S3b) CDQ ≥ 16.5 points 3 years $2291 12.553 19763.0 216(3)
12 (S3b) CDQ ≥ 16.5 points 5 years $2248 12.551 18093.0 173(7)
13 (S3c) Screening spirometry 3 years $2255 12.550 24778.0 107(10)
14 (S3c) Screening spirometry 5 years $2220 12.549 18842.0 117(9)
15 (S3d) CDQ + screening spirometry 3 years $2263 12.549 28562.0 85(12)
16 (S3d) CDQ + screening spirometry 5 years $2225 12.549 22545.0 91(11)

Cannot display original figure as do not have permission for reuse, but can view at Johnson et al. (2021)

Reproduction:

Cannot display original figure as do not have permission for reuse, but can view at Johnson et al. (2021)

Reproduction:

Cannot display original figure as do not have permission for reuse, but can view at Johnson et al. (2021)

Reproduction:

Cannot display original figure as do not have permission for reuse, but can view at Johnson et al. (2021)

Reproduction:

Evaluation against guidelines

Context: The original study repository was evaluated against criteria from journal badges relating to how open and reproducible the model is and against guidance for sharing artefacts from the STARS framework. The original study article and supplementary materials (excluding code) were evaluated against reporting guidelines for DES models: STRESS-DES, and guidelines adapted from ISPOR-SDM.

References

Johnson, Kate M., Mohsen Sadatsafavi, Amin Adibi, Larry Lynd, Mark Harrison, Hamid Tavakoli, Don D. Sin, and Stirling Bryan. 2021. “Cost Effectiveness of Case Detection Strategies for the Early Detection of COPD.” Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 19 (2): 203–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-020-00616-2.

STARS

  • Changelog

  • License

  • Contributing

  • Edit this page
  • Report an issue