Interview with Dr Daniel Lindsay
 | Dr Daniel Lindsay's research involves assessing whether a National Targeted Melanoma Screening Program provides better value for money than the current opportunistic approach in Australia. His principal advisor is Professor Louisa Collins |
What is the main focus of your postdoctoral research, and what impact could it have in your field?
My research looks at the costs of cancer care, including how much different treatments and services cost, whether they provide good value for money, and how these costs affect cancer survivors. I’m especially interested in skin cancer, including prevention and the evaluation of new health technologies. Right now, my main project is comparing the cost‑effectiveness of Australia’s newly proposed National Targeted Melanoma Screening Program with the current opportunistic screening approach. By understanding the economic side of cancer care, my work helps support the wider implementation of health technologies and promote effective and efficient service delivery and clinical practice.
How does your current work build on or differ from your PhD research?
My PhD was in Psychology, which I completed at James Cook University in 2015. This project focused on attitudes towards advertising and alcohol consumption, so is wildly different to what I am doing now. My path into health economics began with a strong interest in statistical analysis, which developed during my undergraduate Psychology degree. After finishing my PhD, I had the opportunity to lecture in Biostatistics and Health Economics at JCU, and that experience sparked my passion for health economics and ultimately led me to my current role.
What methods or approaches are you using that are central to your project?
The main approach I am using for my work involving the cost-effectiveness of the Targeted Melanoma Screening Program is Markov microsimulation analyses. This is a commonly used approach in health economics.
What challenges have you encountered in your research, and how have you addressed them?
The biggest challenge in my modelling work is the uncertainty around several key data inputs that I need to build an accurate and reliable model. As part of the Roadmap to the Targeted Melanoma Screening Program, researchers across Australia are generating new evidence that will feed directly into my model. I’m waiting for these results so that my modelling is based on the best available data and reflects real‑world evidence.
What results or progress are you most proud of so far?
There is no one result I am most proud of so far. As a postdoctoral researcher who is stll relatively early in their research career, it is really exciting to be a key part of a national collaboration of amazing researchers who are all contributing to a single goal. The health economics modelling aspect of the Roadmap to the Targeted Melanoma Screening Program is considered a really important piece of the chain, so it is cool to be heavily involved in the development of a major health intervention.
What’s next for your research, are there any exciting directions or unanswered questions you are pursuing?
We are still trying to figure out what aspects of the screening program would make it most cost effective. For example, how often should people be screened based on their risk of developing melanoma? Answering these kind of questions will help shape the final version of a screening program, so it is really important we get it right.
What are your career aspirations over the next 5 years?
I am hoping to further advance my skills and knowledge in health economics, with a particular focus on skin cancer. I hope to become a more independent researcher and build a team of researchers I can mentor and work with to achieve greater outcomes for people with cancer.
