Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29686540›Full record

ReviewCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2018

Economic evaluation of health promotion interventions for older people: do applied economic studies meet the methodological challenges?

Kai Huter, Katarzyna Dubas-Jakóbczyk, Ewa Kocot, Katarzyna Kissimova-Skarbek, Heinz Rothgang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Kai Huter1SOCIUM Research Center on Inequality and Social Policy, University of Bremen, Mary-Somerville-Straße 5, 28359 Bremen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7500-7042
Katarzyna Dubas-Jakóbczyk3Health Economics and Social Security Department, Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Ewa Kocot3Health Economics and Social Security Department, Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Katarzyna Kissimova-Skarbek3Health Economics and Social Security Department, Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Heinz Rothgang1SOCIUM Research Center on Inequality and Social Policy, University of Bremen, Mary-Somerville-Straße 5, 28359 Bremen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the light of demographic developments health promotion interventions for older people are gaining importance. In addition to methodological challenges arising from the economic evaluation of health promotion interventions in general, there are specific methodological problems for the particular target group of older people. There are especially four main methodological challenges that are discussed in the literature. They concern measurement and valuation of informal caregiving, accounting for productivity costs, effects of unrelated cost in added life years and the inclusion of 'beyond-health' benefits. This paper focuses on the question whether and to what extent specific methodological requirements are actually met in applied health economic evaluations.

methodsFollowing a systematic review of pertinent health economic evaluations, the included studies are analysed on the basis of four assessment criteria that are derived from methodological debates on the economic evaluation of health promotion interventions in general and economic evaluations targeting older people in particular.

resultsOf the 37 studies included in the systematic review, only very few include cost and outcome categories discussed as being of specific relevance to the assessment of health promotion interventions for older people. The few studies that consider these aspects use very heterogeneous methods, thus there is no common methodological standard.

conclusionThere is a strong need for the development of guidelines to achieve better comparability and to include cost categories and outcomes that are relevant for older people. Disregarding these methodological obstacles could implicitly lead to discrimination against the elderly in terms of health promotion and disease prevention and, hence, an age-based rationing of public health care.

Indexed as

Economic evaluationHealth promotionOlder peoplePrimary prevention

Identifiers

PMID29686540
PMCPMC5902889

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.