MDOI Convergence Chronicles 110.0575/CON.2026.00549
110.0575/CON.2026.00549
Article

A Comparison of International Modeling Methods for Evaluating Health Economics of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review

Olivia Adair, MSci, Felicity Lamrock, PhD, James F. O’Mahony, PhD, Mark Lawler, PhD, Ethna McFerran, PhD 2025 Convergence Chronicles

Abstract

Objectives Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is an accepted approach to evaluate cancer screening programs. CEA estimates partially depend on modeling methods and assumptions used. Understanding common practice when modeling cancer relies on complete, accessible descriptions of prior work. This review’s objective is to comprehensively examine published CEA modeling methods used to evaluate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening from an aspiring modeler’s perspective. It compares existing models, highlighting the importance of precise modeling method descriptions and essential factors when modeling CRC progression. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus electronic databases were used. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement and data items from previous systematic reviews formed a template to extract relevant data. Specific focus included model type, natural history, appropriate data sources, and survival analysis. Results Seventy-eight studies, with 52 unique models were found. Twelve previously published models were reported in 39 studies, with 39 newly developed models. CRC progression from the onset was commonly modeled, with only 6 models not including it as a model component. Conclusions Modeling methods needed to simulate CRC progression depend on the natural history structure and research requirements. For aspiring modelers, accompanying models with clear overviews and extensive modeling assumption descriptions are beneficial. Open-source modeling would also allow model replicability and result in appropriate decisions suggested for CRC screening programs.

Identifier Metadata

Identifier 110.0575/CON.2026.00549
Canonical mdoi:110.0575/CON.2026.00549
Resolver URL https://mdoi.org/110.0575/CON.2026.00549
Resource URL Open resource
Document URL Open document
Content Type Article
Authors Olivia Adair, MSci, Felicity Lamrock, PhD, James F. O’Mahony, PhD, Mark Lawler, PhD, Ethna McFerran, PhD
Year 2025
Depositor Convergence Chronicles Organisation
Prefix 110.0575
Registered July 9, 2026
Updated July 9, 2026
Status Active
Visibility Public

Cite This Identifier

APA 7th Edition

Click to copy

MLA 9th Edition

Click to copy

Chicago 17th Edition

Click to copy

BibTeX

Click to copy

Persistent Identifier

mdoi:110.0575/CON.2026.00549

Click to copy

About MDOI

MDOI identifiers are permanent and unique identifiers assigned to digital objects to ensure long-term access, tracking, and referencing.

  • MDOI provides a permanent identity for digital objects.
  • Each MDOI is unique and points to one specific resource.
  • The prefix, such as 110.XXXX, identifies the registrant.
  • The suffix identifies the exact digital object.
  • MDOI remains stable even when a website URL changes.
  • It helps prevent broken links in digital publishing.
  • It makes academic and digital resources easier to find and cite.
  • MDOI supports proper tracking and management of digital content.
  • It improves the credibility and visibility of published resources.
  • MDOI ensures digital objects remain accessible, traceable, and reliable over time.
CO
Registered by Convergence Chronicles