Evidence from cost-effectiveness research.
Economic evaluations are a set of outcomes and health services research methods to inform the debate about the rising cost of health care and include cost-of-illness studies and cost-effectiveness research. Cost-effectiveness research is the comparative analysis of two or more alternative interventions in terms of their health and economic consequences, whose results are expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, the ratio of differences in cost between a pair of medical interventions to the differences in the corresponding health effects. These research methods are particularly important to neurological diseases with debilitating natural histories, long-term courses, and a growing number of exciting, yet costly, treatment options available. The results of economic evaluations of neurological conditions influence resource allocation decisions, help set reimbursement rates, estimate future healthcare expenses, and improve the quality and efficiency of delivering neurological care. For these research methods to achieve their potential, continued methodological advances within the field are needed, as well as a more systematic integration of these methods into mainstream research to address critical questions regarding the health and well-being of patients with neurological illness.
Noyes
Katia
K
Department of Community and Preventive Medicine, University of Rochester, NY 14620, USA.
Holloway
Robert G
RG
D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000191:economics*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D017048:Health Care Costs; D006302:Health Services Research; D006801:Humans; D018803:Models, Economic; D009422:Nervous System Diseases / Q000191:economics*; D012107:Research Design
Pharmacoeconomics. 2000 Mar;17(3):227-36
10947298
Annu Rev Public Health. 1999;20:125-44
10352853
J Clin Epidemiol. 2000 Jul;53(7):688-95
10941945
Med Care. 2000 Sep;38(9 Suppl):II138-50
10982099
Annu Rev Public Health. 2001;22:129-41
11274515
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001 Winter;17(1):69-82
11329846
Value Health. 2001 Sep-Oct;4(5):348-61
11705125
Health Econ. 2001 Dec;10(8):779-87
11747057
Health Econ. 2002 Jul;11(5):415-30
12112491
Value Health. 2003 Jan-Feb;6(1):9-17
12535234
New Repub. 2002 Dec 16;227(25):27-41
12561803
Health Aff (Millwood). 2003 May-Jun;22(3):46-8
12757271
N Engl J Med. 2003 May 22;348(21):2092-102
12759480
Arch Intern Med. 2003 Jul 28;163(14):1637-41
12885677
Br J Psychiatry. 2003 Dec;183:498-506
14645020
Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Jan-Feb;23(1):147-59
15002637
Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Jan-Feb;23(1):160-7
15002638
Health Serv Res. 1976 Winter;11(4):478-507
1030700
Ann Intern Med. 1982 Jan;96(1):102-9
7053682
Crit Care Med. 1988 Nov;16(11):1110-6
3048900
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1990;6(1):57-75
2113891
Health Policy. 1990 Dec;16(3):199-208
10109801
Health Serv Res. 1991 Apr;26(1):53-74
1901841
J Clin Oncol. 1992 Jun;10(6):923-8
1316952
Health Aff (Millwood). 1992 Summer;11(2):162-9
1500048
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1996 Winter;12(1):9-21
8690566
J Gen Intern Med. 1996 May;11(5):303-11
8725979
JAMA. 1997 May 21;277(19):1552-7
9153371
JAMA. 1997 Jun 11;277(22):1802-6
9178794
Circulation. 1998 Jun 2;97(21):2129-35
9626173
J Clin Epidemiol. 1998 Nov;51(11):1115-28
9817129
Health Econ. 1998 Nov;7(7):629-38
9845256
Annu Rev Public Health. 2000;21:587-611
10884966