Non-stationary Bayesian spatial model for disease mapping based on sub-regions.

This paper aims to extend the Besag model, a widely used Bayesian spatial model in disease mapping, to a non-stationary spatial model for irregular lattice-type data. The goal is to improve the model's ability to capture complex spatial dependence patterns and increase interpretability. The proposed model uses multiple precision parameters, accounting for different intensities of spatial dependence in different sub-regions. We derive a joint penalized complexity prior to the flexible local precision parameters to prevent overfitting and ensure contraction to the stationary model at a user-defined rate. The proposed methodology can be used as a basis for the development of various other non-stationary effects over other domains such as time. An accompanying R package fbesag equips the reader with the necessary tools for immediate use and application. We illustrate the novelty of the proposal by modeling the risk of dengue in Brazil, where the stationary spatial assumption fails and interesting risk profiles are estimated when accounting for spatial non-stationary. Additionally, we model different causes of death in Brazil, where we use the new model to investigate the spatial stationarity of these causes.

The Importance of Accounting for Parameter Uncertainty in SF-6D Value Sets and Its Impact on Studies that Use the SF-6D to Measure Health Utility.

BACKGROUND: The parameter uncertainty in the six-dimensional health state short form (SF-6D) value sets is commonly ignored. There are two sources of parameter uncertainty: uncertainty around the estimated regression coefficients and uncertainty around the model's specification. This study explores these two sources of parameter uncertainty in the value sets using probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and a Bayesian approach. METHODS: We used data from the original UK/SF-6D valuation study to evaluate the extent of parameter uncertainty in the value set. First, we re-estimated the Brazier model to replicate the published estimated coefficients. Second, we estimated standard errors around the predicted utility of each SF-6D state to assess the impact of parameter uncertainty on these estimated utilities. Third, we used Monte Carlo simulation technique to account for the uncertainty on these estimates. Finally, we used a Bayesian approach to quantifying parameter uncertainty in the value sets. The extent of parameter uncertainty in SF-6D value sets was assessed using data from the Hong Kong valuation study. RESULTS: Including parameter uncertainty results in wider confidence/credible intervals and improved coverage probability using both approaches. Using PSA, the mean 95% confidence intervals widths for the mean utilities were 0.1394 (range: 0.0565-0.2239) and 0.0989 (0.0048-0.1252) with and without parameter uncertainty whilst, using the Bayesian approach, this was 0.1478 (0.053-0.1665). Upon evaluating the impact of parameter uncertainty on estimates of a population's mean utility, the true standard error was underestimated by 79.1% (PSA) and 86.15% (Bayesian) when parameter uncertainty was ignored. CONCLUSIONS: Parameter uncertainty around the SF-6D value set has a large impact on the predicted utilities and estimated confidence intervals. This uncertainty should be accounted for when using SF-6D utilities in economic evaluations. Ignoring this additional information could impact misleadingly on policy decisions.