-
Lancet (London, England) Feb 1989
Topics: Economics, Medical; Psychiatry
PubMed: 2563792
DOI: No ID Found -
Value in Health : the Journal of the... Mar 2019It is useful for reviewers of economic evaluations to assess quality in a manner that is consistent and comprehensive. Checklists can allow this, but there are concerns... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
It is useful for reviewers of economic evaluations to assess quality in a manner that is consistent and comprehensive. Checklists can allow this, but there are concerns about their reliability and how they are used in practice. We aimed to describe how checklists have been used in systematic reviews of health economic evaluations.
METHODS
Meta-review with snowball sampling. We compiled a list of checklists for health economic evaluations and searched for the checklists' use in systematic reviews from January 2010 to February 2018. We extracted data regarding checklists used, stated checklist function, subject area, number of reviewers, and issues expressed about checklists.
RESULTS
We found 346 systematic reviews since 2010 that used checklists to assess economic evaluations. The most common checklist in use was developed in 1996 by Drummond and Jefferson, and the most common stated use of a checklist was quality assessment. Checklists and their use varied within subject areas; 223 reviews had more than one reviewer who used the checklist.
CONCLUSIONS
Use of checklists is inconsistent. Eighteen individual checklists have been used since 2010, many of which have been used in ways different from those originally intended, often without justification. Different systematic reviews in the same subject areas would benefit from using one checklist exclusively, using checklists as intended, and having 2 reviewers complete the checklist. This would increase the likelihood that results are transparent and comparable over time.
Topics: Checklist; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Economics, Medical; Humans
PubMed: 30832977
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.10.006 -
Medical Group Management 1982
Topics: Delivery of Health Care; Economics, Medical; Forecasting; United States
PubMed: 10256070
DOI: No ID Found -
The Hastings Center Report Feb 1976
Topics: Delivery of Health Care; Economics, Medical; Fees, Medical; Health Services; Human Rights; Resource Allocation; United States
PubMed: 1254456
DOI: No ID Found -
Modern Hospital Feb 1948
Topics: Economics, Medical; Fees, Medical
PubMed: 18905164
DOI: No ID Found -
The New England Journal of Medicine Jan 1986
Topics: Delivery of Health Care; Economics, Medical; United States
PubMed: 3941691
DOI: 10.1056/NEJM198601093140220 -
The New England Journal of Medicine Oct 2023
Topics: Humans; Medicine; United States; Economics, Medical; Patient Credit and Collection
PubMed: 37888923
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMms2308571 -
The Patient Apr 2015Recent years have seen increased engagement amongst health economists with the capability approach developed by Amartya Sen and others. This paper focuses on the...
Recent years have seen increased engagement amongst health economists with the capability approach developed by Amartya Sen and others. This paper focuses on the capability approach in relation to the evaluative space used for analysis within health economics. It considers the opportunities that the capability approach offers in extending this space, but also the methodological challenges associated with moving from the theoretical concepts to practical empirical applications. The paper then examines three 'families' of measures, Oxford Capability instruments (OxCap), Adult Social Care Outcome Toolkit (ASCOT) and ICEpop CAPability (ICECAP), in terms of the methodological choices made in each case. The paper concludes by discussing some of the broader issues involved in making use of the capability approach in health economics. It also suggests that continued exploration of the impact of different methodological choices will be important in moving forward.
Topics: Choice Behavior; Economics, Medical; Humans; Quality of Life; Research Design
PubMed: 25074355
DOI: 10.1007/s40271-014-0080-1 -
Journal of General Internal Medicine 1988
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Costs and Cost Analysis; Economics, Medical; Epidemiology
PubMed: 3132545
DOI: 10.1007/BF02596349 -
Social Science & Medicine (1982) Mar 2017Increasing attention has been paid in recent years to the problem of "too much medicine", whereby patients receive unnecessary investigations and treatments providing...
Increasing attention has been paid in recent years to the problem of "too much medicine", whereby patients receive unnecessary investigations and treatments providing them with little or no benefit, but which expose them to risks of harm. Despite this phenomenon potentially constituting an inefficient use of health care resources, it has received limited direct attention from health economists. This paper considers "too much medicine" as a form of overconsumption, drawing on research from health economics, behavioural economics and ecological economics to identify possible explanations for and drivers of overconsumption. We define overconsumption of health care as a situation in which individuals consume in a way that undermines their own well-being. Extensive health economics research since the 1960s has provided clear evidence that physicians do not act as perfect agents for patients, and there are perverse incentives for them to provide unnecessary services under various circumstances. There is strong evidence of the existence of supplier-induced demand, and of the impact of various forms of financial incentives on clinical practice. The behavioural economics evidence provides rich insights on why clinical practice may depart from an "evidence-based" approach. Moreover, behavioural findings on health professionals' strategies for dealing with uncertainty, and for avoiding potential regret, provide powerful explanations of why overuse and overtreatment may frequently appear to be the "rational" choice in clinical decision-making, even when they cause harm. The ecological economics literature suggests that status or positional competition can, via the principal-agent relationship in health care, provide a further force driving overconsumption. This novel synthesis of economic perspectives suggests important scope for interdisciplinary collaboration; signals potentially important issues for health technology assessment and health technology management policies; and suggests that cultural change might be required to achieve significant shifts in clinical behaviour.
Topics: Delivery of Health Care; Economics, Medical; Humans; Models, Economic; Polypharmacy
PubMed: 28131024
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.01.020