Literature DB >> 7481942

The relationship between cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-benefit analysis.

M Johannesson1.   

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-benefit analysis. Provided that a cost-effectiveness analysis includes all the relevant societal costs, it is shown that a cost-effectiveness analysis can be interpreted as a cost-benefit analysis where the willingness to pay per effectiveness unit is assumed to be constant and the same for everyone. To relax this assumption the willingness to pay per effectiveness unit can be allowed to vary depending on for instance the size of the health effects and the target population. It is argued that cost-effectiveness analysis is best viewed as a subset of cost-benefit analysis, where the aim of the analysis is to estimate the cost function of producing health effects. It is also concluded that to interpret and use cost-effectiveness analysis as a tool to maximize the health effects for one specified real-world budget, will be inconsistent with a societal perspective and is likely to lead to major problems of suboptimization.

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7481942     DOI: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)00353-u

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  11 in total

Review 1.  The (near) equivalence of cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses. Fact or fallacy?

Authors:  C Donaldson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  The decision rules of cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  G Karlsson; M Johannesson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Economic evaluation in healthcare. A brief history and future directions.

Authors:  K Blumenschein; M Johannesson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Health impact metrics for air pollution management strategies.

Authors:  Sheena E Martenies; Donele Wilkins; Stuart A Batterman
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2015-09-14       Impact factor: 9.621

Review 5.  Willingness to pay for a QALY: theoretical and methodological issues.

Authors:  Dorte Gyrd-Hansen
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Healthcare rationing by proxy: cost-effectiveness analysis and the misuse of the $50,000 threshold in the US.

Authors:  John F P Bridges; Eberechukwu Onukwugha; C Daniel Mullins
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party.

Authors:  M F Drummond; T O Jefferson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-08-03

Review 8.  The impact of economic evaluation on quality management in spine surgery.

Authors:  Norbert Boos
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-04-01       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Decision Making for Healthcare Resource Allocation: Joint v. Separate Decisions on Interacting Interventions.

Authors:  Helen Dakin; Alastair Gray
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 10.  Welfarism versus extra-welfarism: can the choice of economic evaluation approach impact on the adoption decisions recommended by economic evaluation studies?

Authors:  James Buchanan; Sarah Wordsworth
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.