Joshua A. Salomon, Thomas A. Trikalinos, Gillian D. Sanders, and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- November 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780190492939
- eISBN:
- 9780190492960
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190492939.003.0006
- Subject:
- Public Health and Epidemiology, Public Health
There are two distinct phases in identifying and quantifying consequences: a broad and systematic review of relevant consequences of the decision being evaluated and identification of data sources ...
More
There are two distinct phases in identifying and quantifying consequences: a broad and systematic review of relevant consequences of the decision being evaluated and identification of data sources and measurement approaches for quantifying them. Cost-effectiveness analyses should identify all significant consequences related to health (survival and/or health status) and resource use in the healthcare sector, as well as consequences in other sectors. Consequences may be distinguished along various dimensions, including the sector in which they occur; groups with different degrees of proximity to the intervention (target population versus other affected groups); and different time points. The Impact Inventory provides a framework for listing all consequences of an intervention, within and outside the healthcare sector, and encouraging explicit discussion of omitted elements and their likely effect on the conclusions of an analysis.Less
There are two distinct phases in identifying and quantifying consequences: a broad and systematic review of relevant consequences of the decision being evaluated and identification of data sources and measurement approaches for quantifying them. Cost-effectiveness analyses should identify all significant consequences related to health (survival and/or health status) and resource use in the healthcare sector, as well as consequences in other sectors. Consequences may be distinguished along various dimensions, including the sector in which they occur; groups with different degrees of proximity to the intervention (target population versus other affected groups); and different time points. The Impact Inventory provides a framework for listing all consequences of an intervention, within and outside the healthcare sector, and encouraging explicit discussion of omitted elements and their likely effect on the conclusions of an analysis.
Lisa A. Prosser, Peter J. Neumann, Gillian D. Sanders, and Joanna E. Siegel
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- November 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780190492939
- eISBN:
- 9780190492960
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190492939.003.0013
- Subject:
- Public Health and Epidemiology, Public Health
The goal of the reporting chapter is to provide guidance on reporting cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) with an emphasis on clarity and transparency. The chapter provides recommendations for each ...
More
The goal of the reporting chapter is to provide guidance on reporting cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) with an emphasis on clarity and transparency. The chapter provides recommendations for each area of a CEA: design, methods and analysis, results, and discussion. It also presents several new areas, such as the need for more clarity in identifying the perspective of the analysis; a structured abstract format; and updated guidance on disclosure of conflicts of interest. Finally, we highlight the importance of reporting intermediate endpoints and disaggregated results, and of providing a detailed presentation of the Impact Inventory to best support the use of CEA in decision making.Less
The goal of the reporting chapter is to provide guidance on reporting cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) with an emphasis on clarity and transparency. The chapter provides recommendations for each area of a CEA: design, methods and analysis, results, and discussion. It also presents several new areas, such as the need for more clarity in identifying the perspective of the analysis; a structured abstract format; and updated guidance on disclosure of conflicts of interest. Finally, we highlight the importance of reporting intermediate endpoints and disaggregated results, and of providing a detailed presentation of the Impact Inventory to best support the use of CEA in decision making.
Peter J. Neumann, Gillian D. Sanders, Anirban Basu, Dan W. Brock, David Feeny, Murray Krahn, Karen M. Kuntz, David O. Meltzer, Douglas K. Owens, Lisa A. Prosser, Joshua A. Salomon, Mark J. Sculpher, Thomas A. Trikalinos, Louise B. Russell, Joanna E. Siegel, and Theodore G. Ganiats
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- November 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780190492939
- eISBN:
- 9780190492960
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190492939.003.0003
- Subject:
- Public Health and Epidemiology, Public Health
The original Panel recommended a societal Reference Case as a point of comparison across studies. The Second Panel reconsidered at length the perspectives that Reference Case analyses should use. ...
More
The original Panel recommended a societal Reference Case as a point of comparison across studies. The Second Panel reconsidered at length the perspectives that Reference Case analyses should use. Many, if not most published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) have not used a true societal perspective. Further, decision-making bodies that have incorporated CEA into health technology assessment to inform coverage and reimbursement decisions have not adopted a societal perspective. Given this backdrop and various options, the Second Panel recommends that all studies report two Reference Case analyses: one based on a healthcare sector perspective and one based on a societal perspective. We recommend that analysts present all items in an analysis as disaggregated consequences in an Impact Inventory to ensure that all consequences, including those outside the formal healthcare sector, are considered regularly and comprehensively, as they have generally not been to date.Less
The original Panel recommended a societal Reference Case as a point of comparison across studies. The Second Panel reconsidered at length the perspectives that Reference Case analyses should use. Many, if not most published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) have not used a true societal perspective. Further, decision-making bodies that have incorporated CEA into health technology assessment to inform coverage and reimbursement decisions have not adopted a societal perspective. Given this backdrop and various options, the Second Panel recommends that all studies report two Reference Case analyses: one based on a healthcare sector perspective and one based on a societal perspective. We recommend that analysts present all items in an analysis as disaggregated consequences in an Impact Inventory to ensure that all consequences, including those outside the formal healthcare sector, are considered regularly and comprehensively, as they have generally not been to date.
Peter J. Neumann, Theodore G. Ganiats, Louise B. Russell, Gillian D. Sanders, and Joanna E. Siegel (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- November 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780190492939
- eISBN:
- 9780190492960
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190492939.001.0001
- Subject:
- Public Health and Epidemiology, Public Health
As healthcare costs rise in the United States, debate is ongoing over how to obtain better value for dollars spent. In this context, the use of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is more compelling ...
More
As healthcare costs rise in the United States, debate is ongoing over how to obtain better value for dollars spent. In this context, the use of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is more compelling than ever. This book, written by the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine, reviews key concepts and analytic challenges in CEA. The authors endorse the original Panel’s concept of a reference case and support its recommendation that analysts take a broad societal perspective; in addition, they recommend a healthcare sector perspective for a second reference case, as well as an important new framework, the Impact Inventory, for detailing costs and effects. The revisions draw on advances in the field and include three new chapters that capture research on decision modeling, methods for evidence synthesis, and ethical considerations. The volume also includes two new worked examples (Appendix A and Appendix B) to illustrate ways to implement the authors’ recommendations.Less
As healthcare costs rise in the United States, debate is ongoing over how to obtain better value for dollars spent. In this context, the use of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is more compelling than ever. This book, written by the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine, reviews key concepts and analytic challenges in CEA. The authors endorse the original Panel’s concept of a reference case and support its recommendation that analysts take a broad societal perspective; in addition, they recommend a healthcare sector perspective for a second reference case, as well as an important new framework, the Impact Inventory, for detailing costs and effects. The revisions draw on advances in the field and include three new chapters that capture research on decision modeling, methods for evidence synthesis, and ethical considerations. The volume also includes two new worked examples (Appendix A and Appendix B) to illustrate ways to implement the authors’ recommendations.
