SummerSim 2017: Untangling Uncertainty With Common Random Numbers: A Simulation Study - Reviewer Mohammad Abdullah Al-Mamun
Jacob Barhak
Reviewer name: MA Al-Mamun
Accept with some corrections
The paper presents an example of the quantification of parameter uncertainty using CRN method in microsimulation study. The authors chose the microsimulation of health interventions to eradicate diarrhea. This kind of paper is really appreciated in the field of stochastic modeling, especially related to cost-effectiveness of some public health interventions. But in my opinion, the paper needs further revision of the purpose, presentation, and discussion. Please address the following issues
Major issues:
1. First of all, the paper needs to state the main purpose and implications clearly. The current abstract needs a sentence or two about the purpose and implications. One assumption: if the model shows the reduction in the variance of input parameter uncertainty, it should be wise to relate that with the implication of the cost-effectiveness!
2. Second, I understand that the authors wanted to choose the simple model to show the simpler CRN method, but audience may find difficulties to understand the interventions to one kind of diarrhea and all kinds of diarrhea. One suggestion would be to add clarification of the problem simply in the method section.
3. Third, I am sure the audience will like the first section of the pencil and paper calculation. But, they may get more confused by looking at the further results. The best thing would be show the results graphically (i.e table 2,3,4)
4. Fourth, authors have given a good understanding of the impact of parameter uncertainty to the cost-effectiveness of the interventions. To maintain the flow of the paper, authors should link the parameter uncertainty of this simple model to the implications of cost-effectiveness. The audience will expect at least one figure or table which will tell them how this CRN reduce the variance of uncertainty and how that can be inferred towards the efficacy of decisions/interventions
5. Finally, the results section should be expanded with some more results. Also, when the authors say this method is simpler, than we need a comparison with the previous literature (probably with murphy et al., (2013)).
Jacob Barhak
Below is final response from Mohammad Abdullah Al-Mamun
Hi Jacob,
I think, I agree with you, the future discussions can have enough meat from this paper as a proof of concept.
Thanks
Mamun