Discounting costs and health benefits in cost-effectiveness analysis has been the subject of recent debate -some authors suggesting a common rate for both and others suggesting a lower rate for health. We show how these views turn on key judgments of fact and value: on whether the social objective i
Whither trial-based economic evaluation for health care decision making?
β Scribed by Mark J. Sculpher; Karl Claxton; Mike Drummond; Chris McCabe
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 2006
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 142 KB
- Volume
- 15
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 1057-9230
- DOI
- 10.1002/hec.1093
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
β¦ Synopsis
Abstract
The randomised controlled trial (RCT) has developed a central role in applied costβeffectiveness studies in health care as the vehicle for analysis. This paper considers the role of trialβbased economic evaluation in this era of explicit decision making. It is argued that any framework for economic analysis can only be judged insofar as it can inform two key decisions and be consistent with the objectives of a health care system subject to its resource constraints. The two decisions are, firstly, whether to adopt a health technology given existing evidence and, secondly, an assessment of whether more evidence is required to support this decision in the future. It is argued that a framework of economic analysis is needed which can estimate costs and effects, based on all the available evidence, relating to the full range of possible alternative interventions and clinical strategies, over an appropriate time horizon and for specific patient groups. It must also enable the accumulated evidence to be synthesised in an explicit and transparent way in order to fully represent the decision uncertainty. These requirements suggest that, in most circumstances, the use of a single RCT as a vehicle for economic analysis will be an inadequate and partial basis for decision making. It is argued that RCT evidence, with or without economic content, should be viewed as simply one of the sources of evidence, which must be placed in a broader framework of evidence synthesis and decision analysis. Copyright Β© 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
π SIMILAR VOLUMES
Evidence-based methodology is enjoying a surge in popularity, but what are the consequences of its rapid acceptance? With contributions from authors associated with the prestigious Cochrane and Campbell collaborations, this state-of-the-art review is essential reading for everyone who uses evidence
Evidence-based methodology is enjoying a surge in popularity, but what are the consequences of its rapid acceptance? With contributions from authors associated with the prestigious Cochrane and Campbell collaborations, this state-of-the-art review is essential reading for everyone who uses evidence
Evidence-based methodology is enjoying a surge in popularity, but what are the consequences of its rapid acceptance? With contributions from authors associated with the prestigious Cochrane and Campbell collaborations, this state-of-the-art review is essential reading for everyone who uses evidence
Evidence-based methodology is enjoying a surge in popularity, but what are the consequences of its rapid acceptance? With contributions from authors associated with the prestigious Cochrane and Campbell collaborations, this state-of-the-art review is essential reading for everyone who uses evidence