An introduction to economic evaluation

What's in a name?

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: This paper describes the main types of economic evaluation techniques. Method: To examine the strengths and limitations of different types of economic evaluations, we used a hypothetical example to review the reasoning underlying each method and to illustrate when it is appropriate to use each method. Results: The choice of economic evaluation method reflects a decision about what should represent "success" and how success should be valued. Measures of benefit and cost must be considered systematically and simultaneously. Claiming that a new treatment is cost-effective requires making a value judgment based on the personal beliefs of the claimant. Even when cost and effect data are objective, a verdict of cost-effective is subjective. The conclusions of an economic study can change significantly, depending on which patient outcome is used to measure success. Conclusions: Clinicians must be sure that important patient outcomes are not excluded from economic evaluations. Economic evaluation is a process designed to produce an estimate rather than a decision. New treatment can be more costly and still be cost-effective (if the extra benefit is valued more than the extra cost to produce it). However, since economic evaluation does not explicitly consider a decision maker's available budget, a new treatment can be deemed cost-effective but too expensive to approve.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)159-166
Number of pages8
JournalCanadian Journal of Psychiatry
Volume50
Issue number3
StatePublished - Mar 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Cost-Benefit Analysis
Names
Costs and Cost Analysis
Budgets
Health Care Costs
Economics
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Cost-benefit
  • Cost-effectiveness
  • Health economics
  • Teaching economic evaluation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

An introduction to economic evaluation : What's in a name? / Hoch, Jeffrey S; Dewa, Carolyn S.

In: Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 50, No. 3, 03.2005, p. 159-166.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{4d20357af719495a932f78174f5b3679,
title = "An introduction to economic evaluation: What's in a name?",
abstract = "Objective: This paper describes the main types of economic evaluation techniques. Method: To examine the strengths and limitations of different types of economic evaluations, we used a hypothetical example to review the reasoning underlying each method and to illustrate when it is appropriate to use each method. Results: The choice of economic evaluation method reflects a decision about what should represent {"}success{"} and how success should be valued. Measures of benefit and cost must be considered systematically and simultaneously. Claiming that a new treatment is cost-effective requires making a value judgment based on the personal beliefs of the claimant. Even when cost and effect data are objective, a verdict of cost-effective is subjective. The conclusions of an economic study can change significantly, depending on which patient outcome is used to measure success. Conclusions: Clinicians must be sure that important patient outcomes are not excluded from economic evaluations. Economic evaluation is a process designed to produce an estimate rather than a decision. New treatment can be more costly and still be cost-effective (if the extra benefit is valued more than the extra cost to produce it). However, since economic evaluation does not explicitly consider a decision maker's available budget, a new treatment can be deemed cost-effective but too expensive to approve.",
keywords = "Cost-benefit, Cost-effectiveness, Health economics, Teaching economic evaluation",
author = "Hoch, {Jeffrey S} and Dewa, {Carolyn S}",
year = "2005",
month = "3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "50",
pages = "159--166",
journal = "Canadian Journal of Psychiatry",
issn = "0706-7437",
publisher = "Canadian Psychiatric Association",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An introduction to economic evaluation

T2 - What's in a name?

AU - Hoch, Jeffrey S

AU - Dewa, Carolyn S

PY - 2005/3

Y1 - 2005/3

N2 - Objective: This paper describes the main types of economic evaluation techniques. Method: To examine the strengths and limitations of different types of economic evaluations, we used a hypothetical example to review the reasoning underlying each method and to illustrate when it is appropriate to use each method. Results: The choice of economic evaluation method reflects a decision about what should represent "success" and how success should be valued. Measures of benefit and cost must be considered systematically and simultaneously. Claiming that a new treatment is cost-effective requires making a value judgment based on the personal beliefs of the claimant. Even when cost and effect data are objective, a verdict of cost-effective is subjective. The conclusions of an economic study can change significantly, depending on which patient outcome is used to measure success. Conclusions: Clinicians must be sure that important patient outcomes are not excluded from economic evaluations. Economic evaluation is a process designed to produce an estimate rather than a decision. New treatment can be more costly and still be cost-effective (if the extra benefit is valued more than the extra cost to produce it). However, since economic evaluation does not explicitly consider a decision maker's available budget, a new treatment can be deemed cost-effective but too expensive to approve.

AB - Objective: This paper describes the main types of economic evaluation techniques. Method: To examine the strengths and limitations of different types of economic evaluations, we used a hypothetical example to review the reasoning underlying each method and to illustrate when it is appropriate to use each method. Results: The choice of economic evaluation method reflects a decision about what should represent "success" and how success should be valued. Measures of benefit and cost must be considered systematically and simultaneously. Claiming that a new treatment is cost-effective requires making a value judgment based on the personal beliefs of the claimant. Even when cost and effect data are objective, a verdict of cost-effective is subjective. The conclusions of an economic study can change significantly, depending on which patient outcome is used to measure success. Conclusions: Clinicians must be sure that important patient outcomes are not excluded from economic evaluations. Economic evaluation is a process designed to produce an estimate rather than a decision. New treatment can be more costly and still be cost-effective (if the extra benefit is valued more than the extra cost to produce it). However, since economic evaluation does not explicitly consider a decision maker's available budget, a new treatment can be deemed cost-effective but too expensive to approve.

KW - Cost-benefit

KW - Cost-effectiveness

KW - Health economics

KW - Teaching economic evaluation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=17144406073&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=17144406073&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Review article

VL - 50

SP - 159

EP - 166

JO - Canadian Journal of Psychiatry

JF - Canadian Journal of Psychiatry

SN - 0706-7437

IS - 3

ER -