Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29421472›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2018

Health care input constraints and cost effectiveness analysis decision rules.

Pieter van Baal, Alec Morton, Johan L Severens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Quantifying the Impact of Capacity Constraints in Economic Evaluations: An Application in Precision Medicine.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Costs and benefits of interventions aimed at major infectious disease threats: lessons from the literature.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2020
    Review
  19. Informing Balanced Investment in Services and Health Systems: A Case Study of Priority Setting for Tuberculosis Interventions in South Africa.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2020
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Pieter van BaalErasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: vanbaal@eshpm.eur.nl.
Alec MortonUniversity of Strathclyde, Department of Management Science, Glasgow, United Kingdom. Electronic address: alec.morton@strath.ac.uk.
Johan L SeverensErasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: severens@eshpm.eur.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Results of cost effectiveness analyses (CEA) studies are most useful for decision makers if they face only one constraint: the health care budget. However, in practice, decision makers wishing to use the results of CEA studies may face multiple resource constraints relating to, for instance, constraints in health care inputs such as a shortage of skilled labour. The presence of multiple resource constraints influences the decision rules of CEA and limits the usefulness of traditional CEA studies for decision makers. The goal of this paper is to illustrate how results of CEA can be interpreted and used in case a decision maker faces a health care input constraint. We set up a theoretical model describing the optimal allocation of the health care budget in the presence of a health care input constraint. Insights derived from that model were used to analyse a stylized example based on a decision about a surgical robot as well as a published cost effectiveness study on eye care services in Zambia. Our theoretical model shows that applying default decision rules in the presence of a health care input constraint leads to suboptimal decisions but that there are ways of preserving the traditional decision rules of CEA by reweighing different cost categories. The examples illustrate how such adjustments can be made, and makes clear that optimal decisions depend crucially on such adjustments. We conclude that it is possible to use the results of cost effectiveness studies in the presence of health care input constraints if results are properly adjusted.

Indexed as

BudgetsDecision Making, OrganizationalCost-Benefit AnalysisDelivery of Health CareHealth ResourcesHumansModels, TheoreticalZambiaCost-effectiveness analysisDecision rulesEye-care servicesHealth care input constraintsHuman resource constraintsLMICOpportunity costs

Identifiers

PMID29421472
PMCPMC5906649

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.