Patti K Curl1, James G Kahn2, Karen G Ordovas1, Brett M Elicker1, David M Naeger1. 1. 1 Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Ave, M-391, San Francisco, CA 94143-0628. 2. 2 Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) contribute to informed decision making, at both the practitioner and societal levels; therefore, understanding CEAs is valuable for radiologists. In light of the recently published National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST) CEA, we aim to explain the terminology, methods, and heterogeneity of CEAs. CONCLUSION: We compared the NLST results to two example lung cancer screening CEAs (which do not rely on NLST data). Both examples assessed screening but reached substantially different conclusions.
OBJECTIVE: Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) contribute to informed decision making, at both the practitioner and societal levels; therefore, understanding CEAs is valuable for radiologists. In light of the recently published National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST) CEA, we aim to explain the terminology, methods, and heterogeneity of CEAs. CONCLUSION: We compared the NLST results to two example lung cancer screening CEAs (which do not rely on NLST data). Both examples assessed screening but reached substantially different conclusions.
Entities:
Keywords:
cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs); low-dose chest CT; lung cancer screening
Authors: Yannick Berker; Lindsey A Vandergrift; Isabel Wagner; Li Su; Johannes Kurth; Andreas Schuler; Sarah S Dinges; Piet Habbel; Johannes Nowak; Eugene Mark; Martin J Aryee; David C Christiani; Leo L Cheng Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-07-16 Impact factor: 4.379