Kristian Bolin1. 1. Department of Economics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. Kristian.Bolin@nek.lu.se
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Smoking is probably the most important among preventable health risks. Health economic evaluation of smoking-cessation interventions, applying a lifetime perspective, is made possible by available epidemiological knowledge. The well established method of performing cost-effectiveness analyses of smoking-cessation interventions involves mathematical modelling (both deterministic and stochastic) of future events important for cost effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: This study surveys cost-effectiveness analyses of smoking cessation, with a particular focus on the mathematical modelling and simulation analyses performed. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search was performed using the databases MEDLINE, Econlit and Academic Search Complete. STUDY SELECTION: Health economic evaluations, published as full-length journal articles, were searched for. RESULTS: 423 studies were identified and 78 were finally included, of which 30 were assessed as being highly relevant, based on the application of simulation modelling. CONCLUSIONS: In general, studies are well performed as regards modelling. Common weaknesses include reporting of modelling details; validation of used simulation models; and the handling of structural uncertainty and different types of heterogeneity.
BACKGROUND: Smoking is probably the most important among preventable health risks. Health economic evaluation of smoking-cessation interventions, applying a lifetime perspective, is made possible by available epidemiological knowledge. The well established method of performing cost-effectiveness analyses of smoking-cessation interventions involves mathematical modelling (both deterministic and stochastic) of future events important for cost effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: This study surveys cost-effectiveness analyses of smoking cessation, with a particular focus on the mathematical modelling and simulation analyses performed. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search was performed using the databases MEDLINE, Econlit and Academic Search Complete. STUDY SELECTION: Health economic evaluations, published as full-length journal articles, were searched for. RESULTS: 423 studies were identified and 78 were finally included, of which 30 were assessed as being highly relevant, based on the application of simulation modelling. CONCLUSIONS: In general, studies are well performed as regards modelling. Common weaknesses include reporting of modelling details; validation of used simulation models; and the handling of structural uncertainty and different types of heterogeneity.
Authors: Fujian Song; James Raftery; Paul Aveyard; Chris Hyde; Pelham Barton; Nerys Woolacott Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2002 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: N F Woolacott; L Jones; C A Forbes; L C Mather; A J Sowden; F J Song; J P Raftery; P N Aveyard; C J Hyde; P M Barton Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2002 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Denis Getsios; Jenő P Marton; Nikhil Revankar; Alexandra J Ward; Richard J Willke; Dale Rublee; K Jack Ishak; James G Xenakis Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 4.981