{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,3]],"date-time":"2026-10-03T17:54:44Z","timestamp":1791050084010,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":48,"publisher":"SAGE Publications","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]],"date-time":"2026-09-29T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1790640000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/page\/policies\/text-and-data-mining-license"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/100000054","name":"National Cancer Institute","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["P30 CA0069"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["P30 CA0069"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/100000054","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"DOI":"10.13039\/100000054","name":"National Cancer Institute","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["P30CA072720"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["P30CA072720"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/100000054","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"DOI":"10.13039\/100000133","name":"Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["R03 HS029223"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["R03 HS029223"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/100000133","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["journals.sagepub.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Med Decis Making"],"abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Purpose:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Many patients with advanced cancers undergo multiple lines of treatment. Optimal therapy sequence (ie, what therapies are given and in what order) is often unknown. We developed methods for estimating quality-adjusted outcomes and cost-effectiveness of therapy sequences, informed by patient-level longitudinal data from electronic health records (EHRs).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We developed microsimulation models with a discrete-time health-state transition framework and propose 2 methods: one using multistate models to estimate transition probabilities and one using observed patient trajectories through the health states, with bootstrap resampling to estimate standard errors. We create synthetic EHR-like datasets to evaluate these methods where within-patient transition times depend on covariates and a copula generator and compare them with Markov cohort models. We provide a demonstration with treatment sequences for advanced bladder cancer (cisplatin- or carboplatin-based therapy followed by immunotherapy), incorporating external information on costs, utilities, and expected adverse events.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Both methods produced well-calibrated results, although the trajectory approach was often superior. The multistate model approach generated lower standard errors but was biased when compared with known results. The sum of squared errors for the base-case multistate model approach was 0.515 (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      value for lack of fit = 0.18), whereas the trajectory approach was 0.056 (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = 0.51). The trajectory approach mostly produced confidence intervals that covered known values. In the example, both methods resulted in a net monetary benefit &gt;0 for the cisplatin-based sequence with a willingness to pay of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Both microsimulations produce well-calibrated results and offer superior performance to a homogeneous Markov cohort. Where available, patient data should be considered to inform cost-effectiveness models while considering the likelihood of unmeasured confounding in the observational EHR data.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1177\/0272989x261485304","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]],"date-time":"2026-09-29T11:40:38Z","timestamp":1790682038000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/sage-journals-update-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Modeling Therapy Sequence for Advanced Cancer: A Microsimulation Approach Leveraging Electronic Health Record Data"],"prefix":"10.1177","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-0445-8978","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Elizabeth A.","family":"Handorf","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Rutgers University, Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, NJ, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-6673-3205","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"J. Robert","family":"Beck","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Fox Chase Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Philadelphia, PA, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-1423-5295","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Daniel M.","family":"Geynisman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Fox Chase Cancer Center, Department of Hematology\/Oncology Philadelphia, PA, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"179","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_3_4_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Gloy V et al. The evidence base of US Food and Drug Administration approvals of novel cancer therapies from 2000 to 2020. Int J Cancer. 2023;152:2474\u20132484. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/ijc.34473","DOI":"10.1002\/ijc.34473"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Siegel RL et al. Cancer statistics 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:7\u201333. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3322\/caac.21708","DOI":"10.3322\/caac.21708"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Miron B et al. Influence of first-line chemotherapy regimen on survival outcomes of patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who received second-line immune checkpoint inhibitors. Urol Oncol. 2022;40:454.e9\u2013454.e16. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.urolonc.2022.05.028","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urolonc.2022.05.028"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_5_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Kohn CG et al. Cost-effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibition in BRAF wild-type advanced melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:1194. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1200\/JCO.2016.69.6336","DOI":"10.1200\/JCO.2016.69.6336"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Diaby V et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of 1st through 3rd line sequential targeted therapy in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer in the United States. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;160:187\u2013196. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10549-016-3978-6","DOI":"10.1007\/s10549-016-3978-6"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Diaby V et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of trastuzumab-containing treatment sequences for HER-2 positive metastatic breast cancer patients in Taiwan. Breast. 2020;49:141\u2013148. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.breast.2019.11.012","DOI":"10.1016\/j.breast.2019.11.012"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Riesco-Mart\u00ednez MC et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of different sequences of the use of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors for wild-type KRAS unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. J Oncol Pract. 2016;12:e710\u2013e723. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1200\/JOP.2015.008730","DOI":"10.1200\/JOP.2015.008730"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_9_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Siebert U et al. State-transition modeling: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM modeling good research practices task force-3. Value Health. 2012;15:812\u2013820. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jval.2012.06.014","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jval.2012.06.014"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Krijkamp EM et al. Microsimulation modeling for health decision sciences using R: a tutorial. Med Decis Making. 2018;38:400. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/0272989X18754513","DOI":"10.1177\/0272989X18754513"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_11_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Gibson EJ et al. Cohort versus patient level simulation for the economic evaluation of single versus combination immuno-oncology therapies in metastatic melanoma. J Med Econ. 2019;22:531\u2013544. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/13696998.2019.1569446","DOI":"10.1080\/13696998.2019.1569446"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_12_2","first-page":"97","article-title":"A brief, global history of microsimulation models in health: past applications, lessons learned and future directions","volume":"11","author":"Schofield DJ","year":"2017","unstructured":"Schofield DJ, et al. A brief, global history of microsimulation models in health: past applications, lessons learned and future directions. Int J Microsim. 2017;11:97\u2013142.","journal-title":"Int J Microsim"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_13_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Handorf EA et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis for therapy sequence in advanced cancer: a microsimulation approach with application to metastatic prostate cancer. Med Decis Making. 2023;43:949\u2013960. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/0272989X231201621","DOI":"10.1177\/0272989X231201621"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Hirsh V Singh J. Optimal sequencing strategies in the treatment of EGFR mutation\u2013positive non\u2013small cell lung cancer: clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2020;77:1466. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/ajhp\/zxaa197","DOI":"10.1093\/ajhp\/zxaa197"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Zhao M et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analysis of 11 treatment paths seven first-line and three second-line treatments for Chinese patients with advanced wild-type squamous non-small cell lung cancer: a sequential model. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1051484. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fpubh.2023.1051484","DOI":"10.3389\/fpubh.2023.1051484"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_16_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Galsky MD et al. Comparative effectiveness of cisplatin-based and carboplatin-based chemotherapy for treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:406\u2013410. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/annonc\/mdr156","DOI":"10.1093\/annonc\/mdr156"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_17_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ma X et al. Comparison of population characteristics in real-world clinical oncology databases in the US: flatiron health SEER and NPCR. medRxiv. 2023. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1101\/2020.03.16.20037143","DOI":"10.1101\/2020.03.16.20037143"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_18_2","unstructured":"Birnbaum B et al. Model-assisted cohort selection with bias analysis for generating large-scale cohorts from the EHR for oncology research. arXiv. 2020. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.48550\/arXiv.2001.09765"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_19_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Putter H Fiocco M Geskus RB. Tutorial in biostatistics: competing risks and multi-state models. Stat Med. 2007;26:2389\u20132430. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/sim.2712","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.2712"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_20_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"de Wreede LC Fiocco M Putter H. Mstate: an R package for the analysis of competing risks and multi-state models. J Stat Softw. 2011;38:1\u201330. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.18637\/jss.v038.i07","DOI":"10.18637\/jss.v038.i07"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_21_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Austin PC Stuart EA. Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Stat Med. 2015;34:3661\u20133679. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/sim.6607","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.6607"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_22_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Austin PC. Differences in target estimands between different propensity score-based weights. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2023;32:1103\u20131112. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/pds.5639","DOI":"10.1002\/pds.5639"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_23_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Westreich D Lessler J Funk MJ. Propensity score estimation: machine learning and classification methods as alternatives to logistic regression. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:826. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2009.11.020","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2009.11.020"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_24_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Torres AZ et al. Analysis of a real-world progression variable and related endpoints for patients with five different cancer types. Adv Ther. 2022;39:2831\u20132849. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s12325-022-02091-8","DOI":"10.1007\/s12325-022-02091-8"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_25_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Rotolo F Legrand C Van Keilegom I. A simulation procedure based on copulas to generate clustered multi-state survival data. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2013;109:305\u2013312. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.cmpb.2012.09.003","DOI":"10.1016\/j.cmpb.2012.09.003"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_26_2","unstructured":"Alice M. Modelling dependence with copulas in R. R-bloggers. 2015. [accessed 2024 Nov 12]. https:\/\/www.r-bloggers.com\/2015\/10\/modelling-dependence-with-copulas-in-r\/"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_27_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.18637\/jss.v021.i04"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_28_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-319-43742-2_24"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_29_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Royston P Parmar MKB. Flexible parametric proportional-hazards and proportional-odds models for censored survival data with application to prognostic modelling and estimation of treatment effects. Stat Med. 2002;21:2175\u20132197. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/sim.1203","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.1203"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_30_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Du X et al. Comparison of the flexible parametric survival model and Cox model in estimating Markov transition probabilities using real-world data. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0200807. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0200807","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0200807"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_31_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Lin D et al. Avelumab maintenance treatment after first-line chemotherapy in advanced urothelial carcinoma\u2014a cost-effectiveness analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2023;21:8\u201315. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.clgc.2022.10.001","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clgc.2022.10.001"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_32_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Taarnh\u00f8j GA Johansen C Pappot H. Quality of life in bladder cancer patients receiving medical oncological treatment; a systematic review of the literature. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2019;17:20. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12955-018-1077-6","DOI":"10.1186\/s12955-018-1077-6"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_33_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Patterson K et al. Cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for patients with advanced unresectable or metastatic urothelial cancer ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy. Eur Urol Oncol. 2019;2:565\u2013571. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.euo.2018.09.009","DOI":"10.1016\/j.euo.2018.09.009"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_34_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Sarfaty M et al. Cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab in second-line advanced bladder cancer. Eur Urol. 2018;74:57\u201362. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.eururo.2018.03.006","DOI":"10.1016\/j.eururo.2018.03.006"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_35_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Dogliotti L et al. Gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine plus carboplatin as first-line chemotherapy in advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium: results of a randomized phase 2 trial. Eur Urol. 2007;52:134\u2013141. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.eururo.2006.12.029","DOI":"10.1016\/j.eururo.2006.12.029"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_36_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Bellmunt J et al. Pembrolizumab as second-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1015\u20131026. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1056\/NEJMoa1613683","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1613683"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_37_2","unstructured":"Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services. ASP pricing files [accessed 2024 Nov 7]. https:\/\/www.cms.gov\/medicare\/payment\/part-b-drugs\/asp-pricing-files"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_38_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Hale O et al. Cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus carboplatin-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment of PD-L1-positive locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy in the United States. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2021;19:e17\u2013e30. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.clgc.2020.07.006","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clgc.2020.07.006"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_39_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Slater RL et al. The cost effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy or atezolizumab as second-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma in the United States. J Med Econ. 2020;23:967\u2013977. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/13696998.2020.1770261","DOI":"10.1080\/13696998.2020.1770261"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_40_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Feng C Le D McCoy AB. Using electronic health records to identify adverse drug events in ambulatory care: a systematic review. Appl Clin Inform. 2019;10:123. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1055\/s-0039-1677738","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0039-1677738"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_41_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Gupta S et al. Automated identification of patients with immune-related adverse events from clinical notes using word embedding and machine learning. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2021;5:CI.20.00109. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1200\/CCI.20.00109","DOI":"10.1200\/CCI.20.00109"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_42_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"O\u2019Mahony JF Newall AT van Rosmalen J. Dealing with time in health economic evaluation: methodological issues and recommendations for practice. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33:1255. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s40273-015-0309-4","DOI":"10.1007\/s40273-015-0309-4"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_43_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Fine JP Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc. 1999;94:496\u2013509. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/01621459.1999.10474144","DOI":"10.1080\/01621459.1999.10474144"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_44_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Austin PC Steyerberg EW Putter H. Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models to simultaneously estimate the absolute risk of different event types: cumulative total failure probability may exceed 1. Stat Med. 2021;40:4200\u20134212. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/sim.9023","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.9023"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_45_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Mahani AS Sharabiani MTA. Bayesian and non-Bayesian cause-specific competing-risk analysis for parametric and nonparametric survival functions: the R package CFC. J Stat Softw. 2019;89:1\u201329. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.18637\/jss.v089.i09","DOI":"10.18637\/jss.v089.i09"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_46_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Powles T et al. Enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab in untreated advanced urothelial cancer. N Engl J Med. 2024;390:875\u2013888. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1056\/NEJMoa2312117","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa2312117"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_47_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Yuan Q et al. Performance of a machine learning algorithm using electronic health record data to identify and estimate survival in a longitudinal cohort of patients with lung cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4:e2114723. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jamanetworkopen.2021.14723","DOI":"10.1001\/jamanetworkopen.2021.14723"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_48_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Galsky MD et al. Treatment of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer \u2018unfit\u2019 for Cisplatin-based chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2432\u20132438. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1200\/JCO.2011.34.8433","DOI":"10.1200\/JCO.2011.34.8433"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_49_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Yang C et al. Propensity score weighting with survey weighted data when outcomes are binary: a simulation study. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol. 2024;24:327\u2013347. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10742-023-00317-y","DOI":"10.1007\/s10742-023-00317-y"}],"container-title":["Medical Decision Making"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/0272989X261485304","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1177\/0272989X261485304","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/0272989X261485304","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,3]],"date-time":"2026-10-03T17:48:30Z","timestamp":1791049710000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.1177\/0272989X261485304"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]]},"references-count":48,"alternative-id":["10.1177\/0272989X261485304"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/0272989x261485304","relation":{},"ISSN":["0272-989X","1552-681X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0272-989X","type":"print"},{"value":"1552-681X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]]},"article-number":"0272989X261485304"}}