Stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis on population benefits

被引:0
|
作者
Chen, Ermo [1 ]
机构
[1] Peking Univ, Sch Math Sci, 5 Yiheyuan Rd, Beijing 100871, Peoples R China
关键词
Stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis; Population benefits; Risk allocation; Return on risk; EFFECTIVENESS ACCEPTABILITY CURVES;
D O I
10.1186/s12962-023-00488-y
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Dealing with randomness is a crucial aspect that cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) tools need to address, but existing stochastic CEA tools have rarely examined risk and return from the perspective of population benefits, concerning the benefits of a group of individuals but not just a typical one. This paper proposes a stochastic CEA tool that supports medical decision-making from the perspective of population benefits of risk and return, the risk-adjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The tool has a traditional form of ICER but uses the cost under a risk-adjusted expectation. Theoretically, we prove that the tool can provide medical decisions trimming that promote the risk-return level on population benefits within any intervention structure and can also serve as a criterion for the optimal intervention structure. Numerical simulations within a framework of mean-variance support the conclusions in this paper. The typical assumption in classical CEA that all get the new intervention versus standard of care may not be the best to achieve the best outcome to population, a mixed structure can be betterThe intervention structure should be modified using a criterion considering slight changes on the structure of the treatment mix.Use a risk adjustment concerning cost and outcome uncertainties in taking expectation in ICER calculation gives the optimal treatment mix for population benefits.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Health Benefits and Cost-Effectiveness of Primary Genetic Screening for Lynch Syndrome in the General Population
    Dinh, Tuan A.
    Rosner, Benjamin I.
    Atwood, James C.
    Boland, C. Richard
    Syngal, Sapna
    Vasen, Hans F. A.
    Gruber, Stephen B.
    Burt, Randall W.
    CANCER PREVENTION RESEARCH, 2011, 4 (01) : 9 - 22
  • [32] WILL COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS WORSEN THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF HEALTH-CARE
    HIMMELSTEIN, DU
    WOOLHANDLER, S
    BOR, DH
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH SERVICES, 1988, 18 (01): : 1 - 9
  • [33] Cost-effectiveness analysis and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios: uses and pitfalls
    Bambha, K
    Kim, WR
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY, 2004, 16 (06) : 519 - 526
  • [34] Bayesian cost-effectiveness analysis with two measures of effectiveness:: the cost-effectiveness acceptability plane
    Negrín, MA
    Vázquez-Polo, FJ
    HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2006, 15 (04) : 363 - 372
  • [35] Risks and benefits of opportunistic salpingectomy during vaginal hysterectomy: A cost-effectiveness analysis
    Cadish, L. A.
    Shepherd, J. P.
    Barber, E. L.
    Ridgeway, B.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2017, 216 (03) : S568 - S568
  • [36] Statistical cost-effectiveness analysis of two treatments based on net health benefits
    Laska, EM
    Meisner, M
    Siegel, C
    Wanderling, J
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2001, 20 (08) : 1279 - 1302
  • [37] Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Define a Breast Cancer Benefits Package for the Uninsured
    Jennifer L. Malin
    Emmett Keeler
    Cynthia Wang
    Robert Brook
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2002, 74 : 143 - 153
  • [38] Using cost-effectiveness analysis to define a breast cancer benefits package for the uninsured
    Malin, JL
    Keeler, E
    Wang, C
    Brook, R
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2002, 74 (02) : 143 - 153
  • [39] HEALTH BENEFITS AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF EARLY CERVICAL CANCER DIAGNOSIS IN BULGARIA
    Slavchev, G.
    Dacheva, A.
    Vutova, Y.
    Djambazov, S.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2023, 26 (12) : S153 - S153
  • [40] Burdens and benefits of placebos in antidepressant clinical trials: A decision and cost-effectiveness analysis
    Kim, SYH
    Holloway, RG
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2003, 160 (07): : 1272 - 1276