WST UWE MA Graphic Arts group 22mar11
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

WST UWE MA Graphic Arts group 22mar11

on

  • 397 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
397
Slideshare-icon Views on SlideShare
397
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Apple Keynote

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Not trying to persuade or dissuade - it’s not for everyone\npart time? things change a lot in 5 years\n
  • Not trying to persuade or dissuade - it’s not for everyone\npart time? things change a lot in 5 years\n
  • advantages: 3 or more years to focus in (hopefully interesting) subject\nintellectually stimulating\nopens up career options\ndisadvantages: low pay\nvery narrow focus - can miss out on practical design skills\n
  • advantages: 3 or more years to focus in (hopefully interesting) subject\nintellectually stimulating\nopens up career options\ndisadvantages: low pay\nvery narrow focus - can miss out on practical design skills\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Colin Robson\n
  • Glaser & Strauss\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • understanding scientific evidence is essential.\nTough decisions have to be made about which interventions to approve.\n
  • NICE\n
  • mostly numerical, textual. \nSome basic graphical techniques used.\n
  • John Snow, 1854\n...\nNumerical/textual information (addresses) would be hard to interpret.\nInformation graphics are suited to displaying certain types of information\n
  • 4 years later... Florence Nightingale 1858 (data from her and William Farr)\n
  • \n
  • Lock/Petterson Ltd.\n
  • MAx Gadney\n
  • MAx Gadney\n
  • Lock/Petterson Ltd.\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Remus, 1984, 1987\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • some findings, but required 250 entries\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • some are interactive, made in Flash\n
  • some are static, made in Illustrator\n
  • Made in inDesign\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Made in inDesign\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Made in inDesign\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • I both hate and love tables of numbers\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • advantages: 3 or more years to focus in (hopefully interesting) subject\nintellectually stimulating\nopens up career options\ndisadvantages: low pay\nvery narrow focus - can miss out on practical design skills\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n

WST UWE MA Graphic Arts group 22mar11 WST UWE MA Graphic Arts group 22mar11 Presentation Transcript

  • Will Stahl-Timmins 22nd Mar 2011 Associate Research Fellow:Visual Presentation of Environment and Human Health Data and Information European Centre for Environment and Human Health
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • what is a PhD? PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • what is a PhD? PhD research intro research training A journey (MA) A journey (PhD)large original research project Current work Opportunities
  • what is a PhD? PhD research intro research training A journey (MA) A journey (PhD)large original research project Current work 3-4 years full time Opportunities 5+ years part time?
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities+ defence
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research introAlso see: A journey (MA)Stahl, W. 2009. Branding and Presentation ofSmart Clothing Products to Consumers in A journey (PhD)Smart Clothes and Wearable Technology Eds.McCann, J & Bryson, D. Woodhead: Current workCambridge, UK. Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • HTA PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD)Health Technology Current work Assessment Opportunities
  • countries with ‘universal’ health care: PhD research intro A journey My PhD (so far) Opportunities
  • Health Policy Medical Practice PhD research intro A journey (MA) EBM A journey (PhD) Current workHTA Opportunities Scientific Evidence
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey My PhD (so far) Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey My PhD (so far) Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey My PhD (so far) Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey My PhD (so far) Opportunities
  • TAR review• 50 reports reviewed PhD research intro• content analysis A journey (MA) A journey (PhD)• graphics categorised Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • OTHERLINE 353 301 PhD research intro AREA A journey (MA) /POSITION FLOW 187 A journey (PhD) 124 Current work102 124 37 38 78 41 5 88 55 44 331 22 Opportunities BAR CHART SCATTER PLOT FOREST PLOT STATE TRANSITION THRESHOLD ANALYSIS DECISON TREETIME SERIES CEAC OTHER OTHER OTHER OTHER
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • Assessed for eligibility (n = 253) Excluded (n = 44) Declined to participate Randomized (n = 44) (n = 209) Allocated to brachytherapy Allocated to stent placement (n = 101) (n = 108) PhD research introDid not receive allocated Did not receive allocated intervention (n = 6) intervention (n = 3) 1 died before treatment 3 had problems during endoscopy 2 died before treatment 1 was un t for treatment A journey (MA) 2 did not ful ll inclusion criteria A journey (PhD) Centers (n = 9) performing Centers (n = 9) performing Current work the intervention the intervention Number of patients treated Number of patients treated by each center (median = 5 by each center (median = 6 [IQR: 1–10]; min = 0, [IQR: 1–9]; min = 1, max = 60) max = 64) Opportunities Lost to follow-up (n = 0) Lost to follow-up (n = 0) Discontinued intervention Discontinued intervention Received stent (n = 45) Received brachytherapy Received second (n = 2) brachytherapy (n = 3) Received second stent treatment (n = 24) Analyzed (n = 101) Analyzed (n = 108)
  • Assessed for eligibility (n = 253) Excluded (n = 44) Randomized Declined to participate (n = 209) (n = 44) PhD research intro Allocated to brachytherapy Allocated to stent placement (n = 101) (n = 108) Did not receive allocated A journey (MA) intervention (n = 6) Did not receive allocated 1 died before treatment intervention (n = 3) 3 had problems during 2 died before treatment endoscopy 2 did not fulfill inclusion 70 1 was unfit for treatment A journey (PhD) criteria 70 60 Centers (n = 9) performing 60 50 the stent placement Centers (n = 9) performing the brachytherapy. 50 40 40 30 Number of patients treated by each center (median = 6 Current work Number of patients treated 20 [IQR: 1–9]; min = 1, 30 by each center (median = 5 max = 64) 20 10 [IQR: 1–10]; min = 0, Opportunities 10 0 max = 60) 0 Discontinued intervention, receiving brachytherapy (n = 2)Discontinued intervention, receiving second brachytherapy (n = 3) Discontinued intervention, receiving second stent treatment (n = 24) Discontinued intervention, receiving stent (n = 45) Lost to follow-up (n = 0) Lost to follow-up (n = 0) Analyzed (n = 108) Analyzed (n = 101)
  • jul 08: Info Vis 08 conference: Health Technology Assessment as an area of application for Information Graphics.jan 09: International Journal of Technology Assessment in PhD research intro Health Care: M. Pitt, W. Stahl-Timmins, R. Anderson, and A journey (MA) K. Stein. Using information graphics in health technology assessment: Toward a structured A journey (PhD) approach. Int.J.Technol.Assess.Health Care 25 (04):555-563, 2009. Current work Opportunitiesjun 09: Data Designed for Decisions (DD4D) conference: NICE graphics: Empirical evidence of the benefits of graphical display.feb 10: Information Design Journal: Graphical Presentation of Data for Health Policy Decisions: An Exploratory Online Decision Task Experiment to Measure Effectiveness
  • measurements test (experiment) online decision gradually increasing task study decision complexity (subgroups) sample: general PhD research intro internet-using measurements: public - respondent decision accuracy, A journey (MA) -driven sample time & preference A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunitiesnumerical presentation graphical presentation
  • measurements test (experiment) online decision gradually increasing task study decision complexity (subgroups) sample: general PhD research intro internet-using measurements: public - respondent decision accuracy, A journey (MA) -driven sample time & preference A journey (PhD) http:// Current workwww.pms.ac.uk/ Opportunities infographics/
  • measurements test (experiment) online decision gradually increasing task study decision complexity (subgroups) sample: general PhD research intro internet-using measurements: public - respondent decision accuracy, A journey (MA) -driven sample time & preference A journey (PhD) http:// Current workwww.pms.ac.uk/ Opportunities infographics/
  • measurements test (experiment) online decision gradually increasing task study decision complexity (subgroups) sample: general PhD research intro internet-using measurements: public - respondent decision accuracy, A journey (MA) -driven sample time & preference A journey (PhD) Current workseed 1 Opportunitiesseed 2 25+ participants...seed 3
  • measurements test (experiment) online decision gradually increasing task study decision complexity (subgroups) sample: general PhD research intro internet-using measurements: public - respondent decision accuracy, A journey (MA) -driven sample time & preference A journey (PhD) Current work increasing complexity Opportunitiessingle group males and females low, medium, high risk males and females
  • measurements test (experiment) online decision gradually increasing task study decision complexity (subgroups) sample: general PhD research intro internet-using measurements: public - respondent decision accuracy, A journey (MA) -driven sample time & preference A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • measurements test (findings) PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • measurements test (findings)Study Duration: PhD research intro36 days (15th June - 21st July2009) A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • measurements test (findings)Study Duration: PhD research intro36 days (15th June - 21st July2009) A journey (MA)244 entries were recorded during A journey (PhD)this time. Current work Opportunities
  • measurements test (findings)Study Duration: PhD research intro36 days (15th June - 21st July2009) A journey (MA)244 entries were recorded during A journey (PhD)this time. Current work48 excluded as possible Opportunitiesduplicates, leaving 196 for theanalysis
  • measurements test (findings)Study Duration: PhD research intro36 days (15th June - 21st July2009) A journey (MA)244 entries were recorded during A journey (PhD)this time. Current work48 excluded as possible Opportunitiesduplicates, leaving 196 for theanalysis99 participants received thegraphical presentation first.97 received the numerical one first.
  • Randomised to receive: Numerical first (N=97) Graphical first (N=99) did not did not complete completetask 1 (N=19) task 1 (N=22) Task 1did not complete did not complete task 2 (N=7) Task 2 task 2 (N=7)did not complete did not complete task 3 (N=3) Task 3 task 3 (N=2) PhD research introdid not complete did not completedetails collection Details details collection (N=6) collection (N=2) A journey (MA)did not complete did not complete task 4 (N=7) Task 4 task 4 (N=2) A journey (PhD) did not complete Task 5 task 5 (N=2) Current workdid not complete task 6 (N=2) Task 6 did not complete task 6 (N=2) Opportunities did not give preference (N=2) Preference did not give preference (N=5) collection 38 people gave a 25 people liked 43 people gave a preference for the the displays preference for the numerical display equally graphical display
  • Average Deaths (mean) Numerical - Graphical group 7787 7787 7787 Graphical - Numerical groupMax. Possible Deaths 7224 7224 7224 95% confidence 5920 mean (g-n group) mean (n-g group) 5466 95% confidenceMin. Possible Deaths 5074 5114 5015 4748 Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 N=78 N=71 N=69 N=65 N=63 N=61 N=77 N=70 N=67 N=54 N=54 N=52
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • NICE technical advisors telephone interviews - needs assessment • 5 interviews PhD research intro • ~30 minutes A journey (MA) • gist transcribed A journey (PhD) • framework analysis Current work • Looking for instances of: Opportunities - complexity - summary/overview needed - comparison needed - time limited - selective focussing needed
  • technical leads 1.01 interview 1 technical advisors 1.02 interview 2 committee members 1.03 lead team 1.04 interview 3 scoping 1.05 interview 4 evidence submission 1.06 interview 5 pre-meeting briefing / overview 1.07 slide presentation / committee meetings 1.08 complexity / overwhelming volume of data 2.01 condensing / summarising / one page only 2.02 comparison 2.03 limited time 2.04 disaggregation / selective focussing 2.05 magnitude 2.06 background of condition 3.01 clinical effectiveness (general) 3.02 survival 3.03 quality of life / utilities 3.04 multiple outcomes 3.05 subgroup analysis 3.06 costs 3.07economic analysis / cost-effectiveness (general) 3.08 model / model structure 3.09 sensitivity analysis 3.10 probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) 3.11cost-effectiveness acceptablility curves (CEACs) 3.12 incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) 3.13 multiple comparisons 3.14 sequencial treatments 3.15 absent information 3.16 changing assumptions at committee 3.17 how informed are decision-makers? 3.18 methodology 3.19 base case assumptions 3.20 uncertainty 3.21 belief/trust 3.22 current use of graphics 3.23 multiple vs single technology assessments 3.24 different backgrounds of committee members 3.25 face validity of results 3.26 scenario analyses 3.27 quality of evidence 3.28 interim analysis 3.29 discrete event simulation 3.30 pair-wise comparisons 3.31 large volume of trials 3.32 quality adjusted life years (QALYs) 3.33 mixed treatment comparisons 3.34 probability in decision-making 3.35 licensing 3.36
  • NICE technical advisors telephone interviews - needs assessmentWhen asked if time was limited (in anypart of the appraisal process), PhD research introinterviewees responded: A journey (MA)“Time is always limited” A journey (PhD)or Current work“Yes, is the short answer!” OpportunitiesAll five interviewees stated that time wasalways limited for decision-makers tofamiliarise themselves with the necessaryinformation before an appraisalcommittee.
  • NICE technical advisors telephone interviews - needs assessment PhD research intro A journey (MA)The most commonly mentioned type of A journey (PhD)data that needed to be compared toanother was the ICER, the overall Current workmeasure of the cost-effectiveness of an Opportunitiesintervention.
  • NICE technical advisors telephone interviews - needs assessmentComplexity was related to clinical PhD research introeffectiveness by three of the five A journey (MA)interviewees. The data presented insystematic reviews of clinical A journey (PhD)effectiveness was reported to be quiteproblematic to present. This is likely to be Current workthe case particularly where there are Opportunitiesdifferent subgroups of people that are ofinterest in the analysis, or where the trialsreviewed used a large number of differentoutcome measures.
  • 10 information graphics The Friday Information Graphic 09 16th Oct 2009 Link diagrams for showing PhD research intro connections between search strategies in multiple systematic reviews A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities Peninsula Technology Information Graphics in Assessment Group Health Technology Assessment www.pms.ac.uk/pentag www.pms.ac.uk/infographics Noy Scott House Will Stahl-Timmins Barrack Road wstahl-timmins@pms.ac.uk Exeter EX2 5DW +44 (0) 1392 406 967 1
  • PhD research intro A journey My PhD (so far) Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey My PhD (so far) Opportunities
  • COGS (Clinical effectivenessOverview Graphical Summary PhD research intro A journey My PhD (so far) Opportunities
  • EFFECTIVENESS AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF COCHLEAR IMPLANTS CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS – CHILDRENTable 15 Summary of study characteristics unilateral cochlear implants vs. acoustic hearing aids – childrenStudy IDMildner et al 2006 125 Design Cross-sectional Intervention group N = 29 Control group N = 20 PhD research introCroatia Age yrs: mean 11.6 (7-15)Length of follow up: n/a Degree of deafness: profound >98 Degree of deafness: profound dBHLN = 49 Mean age (yrs: months) at implant: 8.2 (2-12) > 98 dBHL A journey (MA) Mean time (yrs) between deafness and implantation: Not reported A journey (PhD)Tomblin et al126 1999 Non-randomised controlled N = 29 N = 29U SA Prospective trial with Age yrs mean (SD): 10 (2.9) Age yrs mean (SD): 9 (3.65)Length of follow up: 5 yrsN = 58 cross-overs allowed Degree of deafness: profound Pr e-l i ngu all y deaf Mean (SD) age (yrs) at implant: Degree of Pre-lingually deaf Current work 4.76 (1.57, 2-13) Mean time (yrs) betweenOsberger et al127 1999 Pre/Post prospective deafness and implantation: NR Participants N = 58 OpportunitiesUSA Repeated measures Age mean yrs: 5.4
  • COGS testTask-based cognitive interviewing PhD research intro9 expert users (HTA systematic A journey (MA)reviewers) A journey (PhD)Randomised, sequencial comparison Current workto report OpportunitiesQuantitative results (time andaccuracy)Qualitative results (actions and wordsof participants - framework analysis)
  • Task 4: Can you tell me about selection bias in the Peters et al. (2007) trial please? COGS display report section 1 4 5 8 9 2 3 6 7 6.9% 9.3% 12.0% 12.3% 13.5% 16.4% 17.0% 17.9%24.1%
  • Task 8: Of the unilateral cochlear implants vs non-technological support trials, which reported at least one significant outcome measure, and which measures were these? report section COGS display 1 4 5 8 9 2 3 6 7 5.4% 5.1% 6.3% 7.9% 13.3%15.0% 15.1% 18.2% 32.4%
  • stated preference for COGSkey stated preference for report did not state preference during taskusingreport display 1 using COGS familiar- isation 1 task 1 task 2 task 3 task 4 general reliability 1 PhD research intro display 2 familiar- A journey (MA) isation 2 task 5 task 6 Thematic category 7: A journey (PhD) Preference task 7 Current work task 8 general reliability 2 display 3 Opportunities familiar- isation 3 task 9 task 10 task 11 task 12 probe general questions useful for this review? useful for other reviews? validate tasks interactive version
  • outcome measures used no. of design, size baseline study cog func be glo author location centres & follow-up MMSE sex ages quality ADCS-ADL ADCS-CGIC ADAS-cog other other other CIBIC MMSE DAD PDS CDR QoL SIB NPI GDS 0yr 1 2 0 10 20 30 55 75 95 Donepezil 1mg N = 42 M F Rogers & Rand Donepezil 3mg N = 40 M F ? N = 161 Donepezil 5mg N = 39 M F Char Blind Analy 1mg 3mg 1996 F Placebo N = 40 M 5mg Donepezil 5mg N = 154 M F 5mgRogers et al. Rand M F Char 10 Donepezil 10mg N = 157 Blind mg 1998 (A) N = 473 Analy M F Placebo N = 162 Donepezil 5mg N = 157 M F 5mgRogers et al. Rand M F Char 10 Donepezil 10mg N = 158 mg Blind 1998 (B) N = 468 Analy M F Placebo N = 153 Donepezil 5mg N = 271 M F 5mg Burns et al. Rand M F Char 10mg Donepezil 10mg N = 273 Blind 1999 Analy N = 818 M F Placebo N = 274 Greenberg Donepezil 5mg (D) Rand et al. group 1 (p-D-p-p) N=30 M F Char group 2 (p-p-D-p) N=30 M F Blind N = 60 Analy 2000 Placebo (p) Donepezil 5mg N = 134Homma et al. M F Rand Char Blind 2000 N = 268 M F Analy Placebo N = 129 Donepezil 10mg N = 214 Mohs et al. M F Rand Char ADCS-CGIC ADCS-ADL Blind ADAS-cog 2001 N = 431 M F Analy MMSE CIBIC Placebo N = 217 DAD other other other CDR GDS PDS QoL NPI SIB 0yr 1 2 0 10 20 30 55 75 95 cog func be glo
  • SOC (State Occupancy Chart) PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • Temozolomide model QALYs SOC (state occupancy chart) Temozolomide model costs SOC (state occupancy chart) Length of bars show state occupancy. Colours show QALYs experienced by the simulated cohort. Length of bars show state occupancy. Colours show costs incurred. placebo arm colours show QALYs experienced comparative incremental state occupancy and TMZ arm colours show QALYs experienced in £300k £0 £300k £600k-900k £9m in one model state in placebo arm incremental QALYs experienced in each state one model state in temozolomide arm incurred in placebo arm a state with no cost incurred in temozolomide arm 20 10 0 4 (placebo) 0 4 (TMZ) 20 10 0 placebo arm incremental temozolomide arm state occupancy and absolute costs state occupancy and incremental costs state occupancy and absolute costs 0 250 500 750 1000 stable progressive death 0 250 500 750 1000 0 250 500 750 1000 stable progressive death 0 250 500 750 1000week week week week13 13 13 13week week week week26 26 26 26week week week week39 39 39 39week week week week52 52 52 52week week week week65 65 65 65week week week week78 78 78 78week week week week91 91 91 91week week week week104 104 104 104week week week week117 117 117 117week week week week130 130 130 130week week week week143 143 143 143week week week week156 156 156 156week week week week169 169 169 169week week week week182 182 182 182week week week week195 195 195 195week week week week208 208 208 208week week week week221 221 221 221week week week week234 234 234 234week week week week247 247 247 247week week week week260 260 260 260
  • State Occupancy & Absolute Quality of Life 2 State Occupancy & Absolute Costs Per Person 3 placebo arm treatment arm placebo arm treatment arm 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% week 1 surgery 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% week 1 week 1 surgery week 1 week 2 week 2 weeks 2-6 post-op recovery weeks 2-6 post-op recovery week 7 week 7 weeks 7-12 radiotherapy weeks 7-12 radiotherapy week week week 13+ stable/progressive/death 13 week 13+ stable/progressive/death 13 week week week week 26 26 26 26 is information graphic shows is information graphic showsthe absolute quality of life week week the absolute costs incurred per week weekexperienced by the simulated 39 39 person in the model, on a scale 39 39patients in the model. e week week from black (£3000 per person) week weekshades of grey provide a scale 52 52 to white (£0 per person). 52 52from black (a utility of 1 per week week week weekperson) to white (a utility of 0 65 65 ese shades of grey are 65 65per person). presented in bars whose length week week correspond to the number week week 78 78 of people incurring that cost 78 78 ese shades of grey arepresented in bars whose length in that state in the model, as in week week week weekcorrespond to the number 91 91 graphic 1 — State Occupancy. 91 91of people in that state in the week week week weekmodel during that week, as in 104 104 e small dark bars appearing 104 104graphic 1 — State Occupancy. between the progressive and week week death states represent the week week 117 117 one-o costs assigned to death 117 117 e slowly lightening e ect in in the model. e length ofthe progressive state is caused week week week week 130 130 these bars is again proportional 130 130by the gradual decomposition to the number of people dyingof utility values in this state in week week during that week of the model. week weekthe model. e simulated 143 143 143 143patients experience less quality Similar dark boxes appear week week week weekof life the longer they spend in 156 156 between the stable and 156 156this state. e values presented progressive states to indicatehere are the average (mean) of week week the higher costs assigned week weekthe utility scores experienced 169 169 169 169 to a patient’s rst week in theby the cohort in that week of week week progressive state. week weekthe model. 182 182 182 182 Costs for surgery in week week week week week 195 195 1 are o the scale at £5953 per 195 195 person, but this cost is identical utility of 1 week week week week (per person) 208 208 in both arms of the model. 208 208 week week week week 221 221 221 221 £3000 per person utility of 0.5 week week week week 234 234 234 234 £1500 per person week week week week 247 247 247 247 utility of 0 week week £0 per person week week 260 260 260 260
  • SOC testTask-based cognitiveinterviewing PhD research intro6 expert users (HTA A journey (MA)mathematical modellers) A journey (PhD)Single group study Current work OpportunitiesQuantitative results (timeand accuracy)Qualitative results(actions and words ofparticipants - frameworkanalysis)
  • Tasks for validation Task 4: Where do the costs tend to come from in each arm of the model? PhD research intro A journey (MA)participants must consider both A journey (PhD)length and colour of bars treatment arm Current work 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% surgery = £5.9m week 1 week 2 Opportunities week 7 radiotherapy = £5.4m week 13 week drug course 26(weeks 17– 40) = £5.4m week 39
  • Tasks for validation value value (placebo arm) (treatment arm) surgery £5.9m £5.9m radiotherapy (weeks 7–12) £1.6m £5.4m drug course £0.2m £5.1m(weeks 17–40) progressive disease £6.7m £5.9m death £3.1m £3.1m 1 2 3 4 5 6 39s 109s 100s 119s 166s 240s
  • mentioned by potential times mentioned participants: functions (overall) 5 complexity 1 condensing 0 3 4 5 comparison 5 3 6 limited time 2 selective focussing 0 modelling1 2 3 4 5 6 states 451 2 3 4 5 ICER 161 2 3 4 5 6 costs 44 PhD research intro1 2 3 4 5 6 quality of life 55 4 6 other methods 6 2 3 4 6 6 discounting model validation 2 10 A journey (MA) interpretation1 2 3 4 5 uncertainty 23 A journey (PhD)1 3 4 5 6 transformation 11 6 overview 11 sizing 1 Current work1 2 learning 51 5 obviousness 4 3 4 cognitive load 2 Opportunities 2 5 6 orientation 41 2 3 4 6 units 12 4 5 6 memory 3 actions1 3 4 5 focussing aids 6 2 3 angling 3 3 5 6 peering 5 6 bookmarking 11 3 6 design production 3 Qualitative 2 3 4 5 6 media 811 2 2 4 5 6 5 detail alternatives suggestions 13 4 3 results
  • Question 3: Do you think this kind of displaywould be useful or confusing for a decision-maker at NICE?The most common idea mentioned (by PhD research introparticipants 1, 4 and 6) was that the graphic A journey (MA)would give decision-makers an idea of what was A journey (PhD)‘driving’ the model, and why the costs per QALY(or ICER) were high or not. Participant 3 thought Current workthat giving the decision makers an idea of how Opportunitiescosts and QALYs were accrued over time wassomething that they were not currently able tosee. Qualitative results
  • Conclusionsmeasurements test (findings) PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • Conclusions measurements test (findings)Design of information graphics in HTA Start with user needs Iterative design PhD research intro Formal and informal testing A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • Conclusions measurements test (findings)Design of information graphics in HTA Start with user needs Iterative design PhD research intro Formal and informal testing A journey (MA) A journey (PhD)Production of information graphics in HTA Current work Researchers produce with standard spreadsheet software Develop specialist software for new HTA information graphics Opportunities Production by design on individual basis
  • Conclusions measurements test (findings)Design of information graphics in HTA Start with user needs Iterative design PhD research intro Formal and informal testing A journey (MA) A journey (PhD)Production of information graphics in HTA Current work Researchers produce with standard spreadsheet software Develop specialist software for new HTA information graphics Opportunities Production by design on individual basisUse of information graphics in HTA Assess complexity of data on health intervention being considered Search for creative solutions appropriate to communicate that data
  • COMPARATIVE pilot STUDY testing redesign informal may be needed advice INFORMATION initial design work real data incorporation NEEDS SPECIFICATION PROTOTYPE DEPLOY MONITOR INDIVIDUAL STUDYinformalconversations needs research studies research research research outputs outputs outputs
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • Fi$isEFii$ FiiIili FrFl iEi tiiii$igii ffifF$ "Yl lft st (D o g s ill 3 NCTJ (a T n o R6- 6- o E!? xilir*;$rf alpo t. 9 s cLo $tIrgrir{! F rvBd t rH o o iH$r$FiErFiri$ =o tiil?EH3r rFg[ E13+E[F* iltlf.fi N Fo- A w (Jl { u S H bR s ;e s 6e be 5 (o/o Television of all 36o NJ S&T tv coverage) d ; ts N) HX UJ N) u Ol @ = o ul ol 91 be s ;s s s s 5 0 NJ H (J Ltl t) u (Jl u Ao s s ;s s s s F (o F NJ Radio(% of all radic S&T coverage) & a 6 E -E lqil{$[gfl[Ei w A 5 @ o $f ilF a 3E [l?{F[[u ffilE il[n r-gu$ rE s ;e ;s s s s Ol g Uip- tJ H Ol NJ N) @ @ NJ 5 (7o Newspapers of :e s ;e s s ;e coverage) { @ ! @ N) all press III {+ iFFiigilIitE} ;e >R s s s ;s Ol Totals [lfE +ilFi $i llrs+EEil grcrlgF*tIiF H Ol ! H s s s s s s and the Media. Peter Lang: New York, USA. Boyce, T. & Lewis, J. (Eds.) 2009. Climate Change Opportunities Current work A journey (PhD) A journey (MA) PhD research intro
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • Studentships - Advertisedjobs.ac.ukuniversity sitesprivate arrangement PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • Studentships - Advertisedjobs.ac.ukuniversity sitesprivate arrangement PhD research intro A journey (MA)Funding Proposal A journey (PhD)www.ahrc.ac.ukwww.rcuk.ac.uk Current workcharities? Opportunities
  • Studentships - Advertisedjobs.ac.ukuniversity sitesprivate arrangement PhD research intro A journey (MA)Funding Proposal A journey (PhD)www.ahrc.ac.ukwww.rcuk.ac.uk Current workcharities? OpportunitiesSupport from EmployerPart time, with teaching load
  • Studentships - Advertisedjobs.ac.ukuniversity sitesprivate arrangement PhD research intro A journey (MA)Funding Proposal A journey (PhD)www.ahrc.ac.ukwww.rcuk.ac.uk Current workcharities? OpportunitiesSupport from EmployerPart time, with teaching loadPrivate Funding
  • PhD research intro A journey (MA) A journey (PhD) Current work Opportunities
  • Thank you Will Stahl-Timmins w.stahl-timmins@exeter.ac.ukEuropean Centre for Environment and Human Health