scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessPosted Content

Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
The fourth edition of the Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes as mentioned in this paper has been thoroughly revised and updated, making it essential reading for anyone commissioning, undertaking, or using economic evaluations in health care, including health service professionals, health economists, and health care decision makers.
Abstract
The purpose of economic evaluation is to inform decisions intended to improve healthcare. The new edition of Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes equips the reader with the necessary tools and understanding required to undertake evaluations by providing an outline of key principles and a 'tool kit' based on the authors' own experiences of undertaking economic evaluations. Building on the strength of the previous edition, the accessible writing style ensures the text is key reading for the non-expert reader, as no prior knowledge of economics is required. The book employs a critical appraisal framework, which is useful both to researchers conducting studies and to decision-makers assessing them. Practical examples are provided throughout to aid learning and understanding. The book discusses the analytical and policy challenges that face health systems in seeking to allocate resources efficiently and fairly. New chapters include 'Principles of economic evaluation' and 'Making decisions in healthcare' which introduces the reader to core issues and questions about resource allocation, and provides an understanding of the fundamental principles which guide decision making. A key part of evidence-based decision making is the analysis of all the relevant evidence to make informed decisions and policy. The new chapter 'Identifying, synthesising and analysing evidence' highlights the importance of systematic review, and how and why these methods are used. As methods of analysis continue to develop, the chapter on 'Characterising, reporting and interpreting uncertainty' introduces the reader to recent methods of analysis and why characterizing uncertainty matters for health care decisions. The fourth edition of Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes has been thoroughly revised and updated, making it essential reading for anyone commissioning, undertaking, or using economic evaluations in health care, including health service professionals, health economists, and health care decision makers.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Calibrating models in economic evaluation : a seven-step approach

TL;DR: The lack of standards in calibrating disease models in economic evaluation can undermine the credibility of calibration methods, so it is important to unify the way the methods are approached and report the methods used, and continue to investigate different methods.
Journal ArticleDOI

The Economic Analysis of Prevention in Mental Health Programs

TL;DR: The role economics can play in deciding whether programs designed to prevent mental disorders, which carry large disease and economic burdens, are a worthwhile use of limited healthcare resources is introduced.
Journal Article

Liquid vs. solid culture for tuberculosis: performance and cost in a resource-constrained setting

TL;DR: MGIT gives higher yield and faster results at relatively high cost, and the high proportion of NTM underscores the need for rapid speciation tests.
Journal ArticleDOI

A Systematic Review of the Cost and Cost Effectiveness of Treatment for Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis

TL;DR: Treatment for MDR-TB can be cost effective in low- and middle-income countries, and the relative cost effectiveness of outpatient versus inpatient models of care is limited and more data are needed from Africa and Asia.
Journal ArticleDOI

Comparing preference-based quality-of-life measures: results from rehabilitation patients with musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, or psychosomatic disorders.

TL;DR: Results obtained with different preference-based quality-of-life measures in a sample of patients with mild to moderate disease severity are not equivalent and careful selection of instruments for a given study is essential.