Use of Modeling to Evaluate the Cost-Effectiveness of Cancer Screening Programs

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy B. Knudsen ◽  
Pamela M. McMahon ◽  
G. Scott Gazelle
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Resource Constraints ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Use Of Models

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is an analytic tool that provides a framework for comparing the health benefits and resource expenditures associated with competing medical and public health interventions, thereby allowing decision makers to identify interventions that yield the greatest amount of health, given their resource constraints. Models are important components of most, if not all, CEAs, and they play a key role in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening programs, in particular. In this article, we describe the basic types of models used to evaluate cancer screening programs and provide examples of the use of models in CEAs and to guide cancer screening policy. Finally, we offer some suggestions for important concepts to consider when interpreting model results.

scholarly journals The cost-effectiveness of public health interventions examined by NICE from 2011 to 2016

2017 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 557-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesley Owen ◽  
Becky Pennington ◽  
Alastair Fischer ◽  
Kim Jeong
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
The Cost

scholarly journals The cost-effectiveness of public health interventions

2011 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Owen ◽  
A. Morgan ◽  
A. Fischer ◽  
S. Ellis ◽  
A. Hoy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
The Cost

scholarly journals PCV97 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Public Health Interventions to Prevent Obesity in New Zealand

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. A382
Author(s):  
P. Mernagh ◽  
K. Coleman ◽  
J. Cumming ◽  
T. Green ◽  
J. Harris ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

scholarly journals Interpreting cost-effectiveness ratios in a cost-effectiveness analysis of risk-tailored prostate screening: A critique of Callender et al.

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
James F. O'Mahony
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Disease Risk ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Cost

Callender et al. recently published a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of a risk-tailored approach to prostate cancer screening. It considers the costs and effects of prostate cancer screening offered to all men aged 55-69 without any risk selection and, alternatively, over a range of risk-tailored strategies in which screen eligibility is determined by a varying threshold of disease risk. The analysis finds that the strategy of screening men once they reach a 10-year absolute risk of disease of 5% or more is cost-effective in a UK context. I believe there are several problems with the study, mostly stemming from an incorrect interpretation of the cost-effectiveness estimates. I show that one reinterpretation of their results indicates that screening is much less cost-effective than the original analysis suggests, indicating that screening should be restricted to a much smaller group of higher risk men. More broadly, I explain the challenges of attempting to meaningfully reinterpret the originally published results due to the simulation of non-mutually exclusive intervention strategies. Finally, I consider the relevance of considering sufficient alternative screening intensities. This critique highlights the need for appropriate interpretation of cost-effectiveness results for policymakers, especially as risk stratification within screening becomes increasingly feasible.

scholarly journals Economic evaluations of public health interventions for mental health: A systematic literature review

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
I Feldman ◽  
M Gebreslassie ◽  
F Sampaio ◽  
C Nystrand ◽  
R Ssegonja
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Mental Health ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Suicide Prevention ◽  
High Potential ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
High Quality ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background To review the literature on economic evaluations of public health interventions targeting prevention of mental health problems and suicide, to support evidence based societal resource allocation. Methods A systematic review of economic evaluations within mental health and suicide prevention was conducted including studies published between 2000 and 2018. The studies were identified through Medline, PsychINFO, Web of Science. The quality of relevant studies and the transferability of their results were assessed using a criterion set out by the Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment. Results Nineteen studies of moderate to high quality were included in this review, which evaluated 18 interventions in mental health and 4 interventions in suicide prevention. Fourteen (63%) of all interventions were cost-effective. None of the studies that evaluated suicide prevention was of high quality. The interventions largely focused on psychological interventions at school, the workplace and within elderly care as well as screening and brief interventions in primary care. Nine studies (around 50% of included articles) had a high potential for transferability to the Swedish context. Conclusions Public health interventions aiming to improve mental health have a high potential to be economically beneficial to society, but high-quality evidence on the cost-effectiveness of suicide prevention is limited. Key messages Public health interventions aiming to improve mental health have a high potential to be economically beneficial to society. Evidence on the cost-effectiveness of suicide prevention is limited.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document