Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “ECONOMICS”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 343 records · Page 19Linked to original sources
PubMed1997

Economic evaluation under managed competition: evidence from the U.K.

Although economic evaluation in health care has a long-standing tradition in the United Kingdom, very little is known about its impact on decision making, particularly following the introduction of the internal market. Since managed competition appears to be growing in popularity worldwide, the U.K. is an interesting case study, as the reforms are well underway and there have been a number of efforts to conduct and disseminate economic evaluations. In this paper the potential for using economic evaluation in health care decision making in the U.K. is discussed. Then its actual impact is assessed in two ways. First, two case studies are discussed, on heart transplantation and the use of pharmaceuticals in the management of labour in pregnancy. Second, new data from a recent survey of potential users of economic evaluations are presented, with the emphasis on exploring the reasons for the impact, or lack of impact, of economic results. It is concluded that the NHS reforms increase the potential for the use of economic evaluation. However, there is a need to increase decision makers' awareness of economic studies and to help them interpret study methodology and results. Although worries about validity of economic studies are one of the major barriers to their use, other important barriers relate to the multiple objectives being pursued, of which increased efficiency is just one, and the difficulties of freeing resources from existing services in order to divert them to more cost-effective treatments and programmes.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2003

Herbert A. Simon: Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences, 1978.

In 1978, Herbert A. Simon won the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences, the same Nobel won by Daniel Kahneman in 2002. Simon's work in fact paved the way for Kahneman's Nobel. Although trained in political science and economics rather than psychology, Simon applied psychological ideas to economic theorizing. Classical and neoclassical economic theories assume that people are perfectly rational and strive to optimize economic outcomes. Simon argued that human rationality is constrained, not perfect, and that people seek satisfactory rather than ideal outcomes. Despite his Nobel, Simon felt isolated in economics and ultimately moved into psychology. Nevertheless, his ideas percolated through the economic community, so that Kahneman, whose research advanced Simon's broad perspective, could be the psychologist who won the Nobel in economics.

Behavioral Research↗
PubMed2006

Economic evaluation for ophthalmologists.

PURPOSE: This review will describe the basic concepts of economic evaluation, using examples from the ophthalmic literature. The aim is to provide readers with knowledge about the fundamentals of economic evaluation to enable them to read papers critically, make healthcare funding and planning decisions, and understand the economic evaluation of interventions. REVIEW: Ophthalmic services are often constrained by a lack of funding, and this is true in both high- and low-income countries. Ophthalmology also competes with other healthcare specialities for funding. Economic evaluation is used to identify the most efficient way of allocating and planning the use of these scarce resources among alternative activities. An economic evaluation is typically conducted by comparing two or more interventions in terms of their effectiveness and their cost. Cost is the value of all resources used in the intervention. Effects, or consequences of the intervention, can be measured in monetary terms, through disease-specific outcomes or using health-related quality of life measures. The four most commonly used types of economic evaluations are cost-minimization analysis, cost-benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-utility analysis. There are a variety of intended and unintended consequences of a health intervention, and so the consequences of the intervention may be positive or negative. Economic models, such as decision trees and Markov models, calculate effectiveness and costs, taking into account all the consequences of the intervention, including complications. Uncertainties in the parameters of the models can be expressed through sensitivity analyses and confidence intervals. CONCLUSIONS: Economic evaluation may be used to identify the most efficient way of allocating scarce resources among alternative activities. Its use, if standardized in all areas, can improve the quality of care while enhancing efficiency and thereby enabling more programs to be funded.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2005

Impact of economic crisis on cause-specific mortality in South Korea.

BACKGROUND: Economic changes can be powerful determinants of health. In the late 1990s, South Korea experienced a steep economic decline. This study examines whether the massive economic changes affected trends in all-cause and cause-specific mortality in South Korea. METHOD: Mid-year population estimates of 5 year age groups (denominators) and death certificate data (numerators) from the National Statistical Office of Korea were used to compute cause-specific age-standardized mortality rates before and after the economic crisis. RESULTS: All-cause mortality continued to decrease in both sexes and all age groups during the crisis. Cerebrovascular accidents, stomach cancer, and liver disease contributed most to this decline. A remarkable decrease in transport accident mortality rates was also observed. The most salient increase in mortality was suicidal death. Mortality from homicide, pneumonia, and alcohol dependence increased during the economic crisis, but these accounted for a small proportion of total mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term mortality effects of the South Korean economic crisis were relatively small. It appears that any short-term effects of the economic decline were overwhelmed by the momentum of large declines in causes of death such as stroke, stomach cancer, and liver disease, which are probably related to exposures with much longer aetiological periods. However, this study focused on rather immediate mortality effects and follow-up studies are needed to elucidate any longer-term health effects of the South Korean economic crisis.

Accidents, Traffic↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Collection of health-economic data alongside clinical trials: is there a future for piggyback evaluations?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article is to discuss issues surrounding the conduct of "piggyback evaluations," in which health-economic data are collected within an otherwise typical clinical trial. METHODS: We review the methodologic literature on piggyback economic evaluations, as well as selected empiric studies. We summarize the challenges encountered in the conduct of these studies, alternative ways of addressing these challenges, and their future role in pharmacoeconomic research. RESULTS: Piggyback evaluations have certain advantages over other types of pharmacoeconomic studies. An economic evaluation can benefit from the experimental design that maximizes the trial's internal validity, and it is often more practical to collect economic data alongside a trial rather than to fund a stand-alone economic study. However, piggyback evaluations are subject to problems deriving from the competing nature of clinical versus economic study objectives, which can give rise to tension in such fundamental aspects of study design as the selection of study subjects and sites; the extent of protocol-mandated health-care services; and the determination of sample size, length of follow-up, and the study comparator(s). Many solutions have been put forth in the literature to address these challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Piggyback evaluations can be an appropriate means to measure the economic impact of medical interventions, provided that the methodologic challenges are acknowledged and addressed within the context of each individual study. As long as a desire for patient-level data from clinical trials exists, there will be a need for piggyback economic evaluations in the future.

Clinical Protocols↗
PubMed2002

[Health economics: should it concern the health sector?].

This paper addresses the most important features of health economics, especially its scope and applications within the sphere of health. Health economics is a field of study which allows countries to gear their health policies toward making more rational use of their resources and expanding and improving their health care services. Such policies should, on the other hand, aim to generate strategies for adequately managing human, technical, economic, and financial resources so as to reap the finest health benefits possible. A knowledge of how economics can be applied to health will enable health professionals to introduce an economics culture into their daily work. In other words, it will allow them to keep in mind the scope of their various working tools--health planning, national health accounts and accounting, and economic assessment methods, which include health and pharmaceutical technology assessment and pharmacoeconomics--as well as the place that economics has in health research. Hopefully, a knowledge of these aspects of economic analysis will provide decision-makers with one more tool they can apply in selecting more efficient options and attaining the highest health benefits at the lowest possible cost for the national health system.

Delivery of Health Care↗
PubMed1993

Economics and planning in the veterinary undergraduate programme: a model for sub-Saharan Africa.

Veterinarians in sub-Saharan Africa work in resource-deficient environments. Decisions taken by veterinarians in this sub-region, on animal health, animal husbandry and public health issues, are therefore influenced by economic factors including macro-economic considerations related to the current structural adjustment programmes being implemented in the sub-region. In turn, decisions or advice given by veterinarians have socio-economic consequences on clients, on the effectiveness of the delivery systems for veterinary services and on the growth of national economies. For these reasons, economics and planning should be essential components of all modern veterinary undergraduate programmes in sub-Saharan Africa, in order to give veterinarians a basis for making decisions and giving advice which is both technically and economically sound. The authors argue that principles of livestock economics, livestock enterprise management, livestock investment analysis and economics of animal health care are necessary elements in economics and planning courses. They propose a division of these elements into discrete course units to allow for flexibility and adaptability to the different curriculum structures of schools in sub-Saharan Africa and, possibly, continuing professional development courses. The resource requirement for teaching the courses, the integration of the units in the undergraduate programme and the problems which are likely to be encountered in developing the courses are discussed.

Africa↗
PubMed2006

Analysis sans frontières: can we ever make economic evaluations generalisable across jurisdictions?

Over the last decade or so, a number of healthcare systems have used economic evaluations as a formal input into decisions about the coverage or reimbursement of new healthcare interventions. This change in the policy landscape has placed some important demands on the design and characteristics of economic evaluation and these are increasingly evident in studies being presented to decision makers. One challenge has been to make studies specific to the context in which the decision is being taken. This is because of the inevitable geographical variation in many of the parameters within an analysis. There has been a series of important contributions to the published literature in recent years on how to quantify geographical heterogeneity within economic analyses based on randomised controlled trials. However, there are good reasons for economic evaluation for decision making to be undertaken using methods of evidence synthesis and decision analytical modelling, but issues of geographical variation still need to be handled appropriately. The key requirements of economic evaluations for decision making within healthcare systems can be defined as follows: (i) a design that meets the objectives and constraints of the healthcare system; (ii) coherent and complete specification of the decision problem; (iii) inclusion of all relevant evidence; and (iv) recognition and appropriate handling of uncertainty. In satisfying these requirements, it is important to be aware of variation between jurisdictions, and this imposes some important analytical requirements on economic studies. While many agencies have produced guidelines on preferred methods for healthcare economic evaluation, these exhibit considerable variation. Some of this variation can be justified by genuine differences between systems in clinical practice, objectives and constraints, while some of the variation relates to differences of opinion about appropriate analysis given methodological uncertainty. However, some of the variation in guidance is difficult to justify and is inconsistent with the aims and objectives of the systems the analyses are seeking to inform. Decision makers and analysts need to work together to streamline and where possible harmonise guidelines on methods for economic evaluations, whilst recognising legitimate variation in the needs of different healthcare systems. Otherwise, there is the risk that scarce resources will be wasted in producing country-specific analyses in situations where these are not justified. Expected value of information analyses are also emerging as a tool that could be considered by decision makers to guide their policy on the acceptance or non-acceptance of data from other jurisdictions.

Economics, Pharmaceutical↗
PubMed2006

Economic evaluation and decision making in the UK.

This article reviews the development of economic evaluation of health technologies in the UK and its impact on decision making. After a long period of limited impact from studies mainly carried out as academic exercises, the advent of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in 1999 provided a transparent decision-making context where economic evaluation plays a central role. This article reviews some of the key characteristics about the way NICE works, for example, the way NICE has defined the form of analysis that it requires, reflecting its objective of maximising health gain (QALYs) from the predetermined and limited UK NHS budget. Two broad areas of widespread concern are noted. The first relates to the cost-effectiveness thresholds that NICE uses and the basis for them. The second is the patchy implementation of NICE guidance and the possible reasons for this. But even within the UK, NICE is the exception in making extensive and explicit use of economic evaluation and this article goes on to suggest that if there is to be a more widespread and consistent use of economic evaluation at both central and local levels, then health economists and others need to address three issues. The first is to be clear about what is the correct conceptual basis for determining the cost-effectiveness threshold and then to ensure that NICE has the empirical evidence to set it appropriately. The second is to recognise that even using the limited view of costs adopted by NICE, economic evaluations imply temporal and cross-service budgetary flexibility that the NHS locally does not in practice enjoy. The third issue is that with academic pressures for ever-increasing sophistication of 'state of the art' economic evaluation analysis, the NHS has more and more precise understanding of the cost effectiveness of just a few new technologies and little or no analysis of most. This limits the value of the former by reducing further the scope for appropriately disinvesting from cost-ineffective technologies to meet the additional costs of investing in cost-effective new ones. Whilst NICE stands out as an example of a context where high-quality economic evaluation plays a major role in decision making, the process is far from perfect and certainly is not representative of the use made of economic evaluation by the NHS as a whole. Health economists need to engage with the public and the health service to better understand their perspectives, rather than focusing on academic concerns relating to details of theory and analytical method.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2000

The health effects of economic sanctions and embargoes: the role of health professionals. Ethics and Human Rights Committee.

As a widely used tool of foreign policy, economic sanctions take many forms. They include mandating trade restrictions (for example, limiting imports from or exports to a sanctioned nation), freezing bank accounts, limiting international travel to and from an area, imposing additional tariffs, and exerting other pressures that are intended to slow key economic activities. Since the end of the Cold War, as the global market has expanded, many countries and the United Nations have increasingly used economic sanctions instead of military intervention to compel nations to end civil or extraterritorial war or to reduce abuse of human rights. Similarly, the United States has attempted to influence international governments' domestic policies by using other economic means, such as relating "most favored nation" trading status to a country's human rights record or prohibiting the import of goods from countries in which illegal child labor is widespread. Repercussions from these measures influence a country's economic development and, therefore, can also affect the overall welfare of a nation's population. In contrast to war's easily observable casualties, the apparently nonviolent consequences of economic intervention seem like an acceptable alternative. However, recent reports suggest that economic sanctions can seriously harm the health of persons who live in targeted nations. For this reason, the American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine has undertaken this examination of physicians' roles in addressing the health effects of economic sanctions.

Economics↗
PubMed2005

Quality appraisal of pediatric health economic evaluations.

OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to appraise the quality of published pediatric economic evaluations. METHODS: Two independent reviewers appraised 149 randomly selected pediatric health economic studies. Data were collected from full economic evaluations published between 1980 and 1999. Economic evaluations of interventions, programs, and services aimed at neonates to adolescents were included. The Pediatric Quality Appraisal Questionnaire (PQAQ) was used for appraisal. The PQAQ is a 57-item instrument with 13 domains scored from 0 to 1 and one descriptive domain, each corresponding to a key aspect of health economic methodology. The primary outcome was the score for each domain. Additional analyses examined the global rating, the distribution of analytic technique, and the association between domain score and analytic technique. RESULTS: A total of 38 percent of publications were very good to excellent, whereas 43 percent were fair or worse. Although the Discounting, Target Population, Economic Evaluation, Conclusions, and Comparators domains exhibited good quality (0.74 to 0.78), the papers were of poor quality for Conflict of Interest, Incremental Analysis, and Perspective (0.32 to 0.39). Analytic technique was a significant predictor of quality for study design-related domains, with cost-utility analyses demonstrating the highest domain scores. CONCLUSIONS: Domains closely related to the elements of economic evaluation demonstrated medium to high quality. However, domains related to analysis fared poorly and are worthy of further methodological research to improve the use of health economic methods in children.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1996

Choice and accountability in health promotion: the role of health economics.

Choices need to be made between competing uses of health care resources. There is debate about how these choices should be made, who should make them and the criteria upon which they should be made. Evaluation of health care is an important part of this debate. It has been suggested that the contribution of health economics to the evaluation of health promotion is limited, both because the methods and principles underlying economic evaluation are unsuited to health promotion, and because the political and cultural processes governing the health care system are more appropriate mechanisms for allocating health care resources than systematic economic analysis of the costs and benefits of different health care choices. This view misrepresents and misunderstands the contribution of health economics to the evaluation of health promotion. It overstates the undoubted methodological difficulties of evaluating health promotion. It also argues, mistakenly, that economists see economic evaluation as a substitute for the political and cultural processes governing health care, rather than an input to them. This paper argues for an economics input on grounds of efficiency, accountability and ethics, and challenges the critics of the economic approach to judge alternative mechanisms for allocating resources by the same criteria.

Choice Behavior↗
PubMed1987

A demographic-economic explanation of political stability: Mauritius as a microcosm.

"This paper examines current models of economic and political development--social modernization theory, political and economic characteristics of stable regimes, and cross country analysis of political stability--and tests them on the Indian Ocean Island of Mauritius. The analysis continues with a causal explanation for political stability in Mauritius' recent history, derived from an examination of economic policies and demographic patterns. Political change in Mauritius over the past sixty years seems to be explained best by a model for political stability which integrates specific economic and demographic factors. The model, applicable to development in other third world nations, revises Malthus' conclusion that population and economic conditions move in an oscillatory relationship and replaces it with a more comprehensive theory, suggesting that political stability is a function of both economic development and a repeating cyclical relationship between economics and population."

Africa↗
PubMed2003

Economic evaluation of programs or interventions in the management of rheumatoid arthritis: defining a consensus-based reference case.

Improvement in the quality of economic evaluation could be documented as a consequence of international and national standardization efforts. One such effort is the recommendation that all economic evaluations in a given field produce findings in a standard format using a reference case. A reference case-based economic evaluation would adhere to specific settings with regard to outcomes, comparators, modeling techniques, and use of costs to facilitate comparisons among economic evaluations performed with the same objective. In the past, the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) consensus conference has successfully developed widely used, consensus-based outcome criteria for clinical improvement in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Present efforts are being directed at the development of recommendations for the type and format of a reference case economic evaluation for newly developed disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD). This document discusses 13 important elements that experts considered to be relevant for the development of a reference case recommendation for economic evaluations in RA. We provide the rationale for each element and discuss how each element has been addressed in published economic evaluations of DMARD.

Antirheumatic Agents↗
PubMed1998

Issues in the design of studies for the economic evaluation of new atypical antipsychotics: the ESTO study.

BACKGROUND: Increasing attention is being focused on the costs of healthcare and the need for cost-effective treatments. Drugs for schizophrenia have not escaped this scrutiny, especially now that several new agents are available, with acquisition costs substantially higher than for established therapies. However, most of the existing evaluations of new drugs for schizophrenia have weak designs, either comparing health care costs before and after introduction of the new drug, or being based on modelling approaches incorporating numerous assumptions. AIM OF THE STUDY: The aim of the study was to discuss and resolve the key design issues in the planning of a prospective randomized trial to assess the socio-economic impact of a new atypical antipsychotic (quetiapine). METHODS: Key methodological issues were identified and discussed in the context of the economic evaluation being planned. These were patient recruitment and entry criteria, selection of comparator drug, blinding of doctor and patient, range of socio-economic outcomes, length of follow-up and sample size. RESULT: The resulting economic evaluation, the ESTO study, was an international multi-centre randomized controlled trial, with concurrent data collection for a wide range of clinical, economic and quality of life outcomes. The trial had a pragmatic design, enrolling patients experiencing an acute exacerbation on existing therapy. In addition to the presenting exacerbation, patients must have had at least one hospitalization or documented evidence of exacerbation within the previous three years. On admission to the study, existing psychotic medication was withdrawn prior to randomization to quetiapine or haloperidol. Doses of both drugs were titrated up to an optional dose, with flexibility for additional increases if required. Both patients and doctors were blinded to treatment allocations, on the grounds that, since quetiapine was still in development, unblinded assessments of efficacy would not be credible. Patients were followed for 1 year, irrespective of whether they withdrew from study medication. A wide range of socio-economic outcomes was assessed, including costs falling on the healthcare sector, other agencies and the family. In addition data were collected on patients' earnings and quality of life, measured by the Short-Form 36 health profile. Data were also collected on a range of clinical measures, such as the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI), the AIMS neurological rating scale and the neurological rating scale of Simpson and Angus. This was to assess whether changes in socio-economic end points were indeed matched by changes in the patient's clinical condition. CONCLUSIONS: The design of studies such as ESTO is inevitably a compromise between control and pragmatism. For example, whilst blinding of doctor and patient may reduce potential bias, this may cause difficulty with compliance owing to the use of additional dummy medications. Despite these compromises, the ESTO study should provide a more reliable assessment of the socio-economic outcomes of a new anti-psychotic and has attracted the widespread support of analysts and investigators. It has already served as a template for other studies and, if the methodology is successful, will have implications for the assessment of similar drugs in the future

Journal Article↗
PubMed1994

Economic analyses of clinical trials in cancer: are they helpful to policy makers?

Although clinical trials are being used to evaluate economic outcomes of new agents, there are methodological problems. Decisions based on these analyses may lead to inefficient use of medical resources. Randomized clinical trials provide important information on the efficacy of new pharmaceutical agents for cancer patients. Policy makers are likely to require both economic and clinical data in order to approve pharmaceuticals for widespread use. Clinical trials provide an opportunity to evaluate economic outcomes for new agents. However, the interpretation of economic analyses of clinical trials raises issues related to perspective of the investigators, study design, collection of data on resource utilization, and generalizability of data to other settings. In this paper, we review these issues and illustrate problems associated with analyses of economic data from a recent phase III trial of hematopoietic growth factors. Clinical results were similar in both Paris and New York in this phase III trial. However, economic results differed markedly between the hospital in Paris and the hospital in New York. While significant savings in terms of fewer days in the hospital and fewer laboratory tests and radiographs for the granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) patients were noted at the New York hospital, resource savings were not identified at the hospital in France. Caution must be used when reimbursement policies are based on economic analyses of clinical trials. Policy decisions must be based on studies that are carefully conducted, analyzed, and interpreted from both a clinical and an economic perspective.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed1995

A critical review of health-related economic evaluations in Australia: implications for health policy.

In Australia, as in many other countries, economic evaluation is increasingly seen by health care policy makers as a useful aid to priority setting and resource allocation. In Australia, economic evaluation is now a requirement for new drugs to be listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme which provides a government subsidy on the price of listed drugs for purchasers. Yet, despite recognition of the importance of economic evaluation by policy makers, there is a paucity of published evaluations in Australia. We reviewed all of the 33 health-related economic evaluations conducted in Australia and subsequently published since 1978. This study assesses how well informed decision makers might be if they used the results and conclusions of published economic evaluations as an aid to resource allocation. The review highlights several issues: (i) it is difficult to interpret the conclusions or assess the generalisability of individual papers without information on the context of the original study; (ii) the choice of comparator(s) was often unexplained and most papers did not employ marginal analysis; (iii) in the absence of marginal analysis, the comparability of cost-effectiveness ratios in league tables must be questioned as well as the completeness (were all the relevant alternatives included?) of studies; and (iv) the quality of effectiveness evidence varies enormously, with some authors content to use the best available evidence (even if it is of poor quality). The development of standards for economic evaluation methods might ensure a more consistent and scientific approach to evaluative work, but they cannot guarantee it. A more concerted effort to disseminate the principles and methods of economic evaluation to policy makers and non-economist evaluators might be a more important precursor to improving the credibility and usefulness of economic evaluations in priority setting.

Australia↗
PubMed1995

Economic evaluation of health care and policymaking.

The interest in economic evaluation of health care programmes is steadily increasing, but the impact of economic evaluations on decisions concerning the allocation of resources to health care programmes is unclear. In this paper we examine different decision and policy situations where economic evaluation of health care programmes could potentially be used. Economic evaluation as an aid to: the development of treatment guidelines, decisions within health care organizations, introduction of new medical technologies, reimbursement decisions, and pricing decisions are examined. It is concluded that economic evaluation seems to be most useful in the development of treatment guidelines and as an aid to reimbursement decisions. The importance of the incentives to use economic evaluation embodied in the health care system is also stressed. It is argued that it is too early to introduce regulations that require the use of economic evaluation in for instance reimbursement decisions. A more cautious approach may be preferred with economic evaluation used more selectively until the methods and the field have developed further.

Decision Making, Organizational↗