scholarly journals Economic Evaluation for Health Investments En Route to Universal Health Coverage: Cost-Benefit Analysis or Cost-Effectiveness Analysis?

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony J. Culyer ◽  
Kalipso Chalkidou
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Universal Health Coverage ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Health Coverage ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Health Investments ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Universal Health

The Principles and Objectives of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

1968 ◽  
Vol 72 (685) ◽  
pp. 43-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Stratton
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Decision Processes ◽  
The Political ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Value For Money ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
National Newspaper ◽  
Is Value

The terms “cost-effectiveness” and to a lesser degree “cost-benefit” analysis have become familiar words in the technical and national press, the former usually in relation to defence projects—the latter in relation to social projects, such as transport, power generation and building. Indeed, at the time of the last General Election the political correspondent of a national newspaper wrote, “Mr. Heath and Mr. Callaghan, Chancellor of the Exchequer, vied with each other in stressing the importance of cost-effectiveness, which used to be known as getting value for money”. The apparently simple concept of “value for money” raises three important issues: (i) how is “value” of defence and social projects quantified? (ii) what is the “money” involved, i.e. what are all the relevant costs? and (iii) what are the information and decision processes that are used in attempting to obtain “value for money“?

Application of Cost-Benefit Analysis to the Health Services and the Special Case of Technologic Innovation

1974 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herbert E. Klarman
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Public Sector ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
The Public ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

As an economic technique for evaluating specific projects or programs in the public sector, cost-benefit analysis is relatively new. In this paper, the theory and practice of cost-benefit analysis in general are discussed as a basis for considering its role in assessing technology in the health services. A review of the literature on applications of cost-benefit or cost-effectiveness analysis to the health field reveals that few complete studies have been conducted to date. It is suggested that an adequate analysis requires an empirical approach in which costs and benefits are juxtaposed, and in which presumed benefits reflect an ascertained relationship between inputs and outputs. A threefold classification of benefits is commonly employed: direct, indirect, and intangible. Since the latter pose difficulty, cost-effectiveness analysis is often the more practicable procedure. After summarizing some problems in predicting how technologic developments are likely to affect costs and benefits, the method of cost-benefit analysis is applied to developments of health systems technology in two settings-the hospital and automated multiphasic screening. These examples underscore the importance of solving problems of measurement and valuation of a project or program in its concrete setting. Finally, barriers to the performance of sound and systematic analysis are listed, and the political context of decision making in the public sector is emphasized.

scholarly journals Systematic Review of the Economic Evaluation of Returning Incidental Findings in Genomic Research

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mayara Fontes Marx ◽  
John E. Ataguba ◽  
Jantina de Vries ◽  
Ambroise Wonkam
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Incidental Findings ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Genomic Sequencing ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
The Cost

Objectives: Discussions regarding who and how incidental findings (IFs) should be returned and the ethics behind returning IFs have increased dramatically over the years. However, information on the cost and benefits of returning IFs to patients remains scanty.Design: This study systematically reviews the economic evaluation of returning IFs in genomic sequencing. We searched for published articles on the cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, and cost-utility of IFs in Medline, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar.Results: We found six published articles that met the eligibility criteria of this study. Two articles used cost analysis only, one used cost-benefit analysis only, two used both cost analysis and cost-effectiveness, and one used both cost-benefit analysis and cost-utility to describe the cost of returning IFs in genomic sequencing.Conclusion: While individuals value the IF results and are willing to pay for them, the cost of returning IFs depends on the primary health condition of the patient. Although patients were willing to pay, there was no clear evidence that returning IFs might be cost-effective. More rigorous economic evaluation studies of IFs are needed to determine whether or not the cost of returning IFs is beneficial to the patient.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document