Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31098947›Full record

ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2019

Striving for a Societal Perspective: A Framework for Economic Evaluations When Costs and Effects Fall on Multiple Sectors and Decision Makers.

Simon Walker, Susan Griffin, Miqdad Asaria, Aki Tsuchiya, Mark Sculpher

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

65 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Economic Evaluations of Physical Exercise at Work: A Scoping Review.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Impact of postoperative in-hospital continuous vital sign monitoring on healthcare costs, resource utilization and labor market outcomes.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Simon WalkerCentre for Health Economics, Alcuin a Block, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK. simon.walker@york.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-5750-3691
Susan GriffinCentre for Health Economics, Alcuin a Block, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
Miqdad AsariaLSE Health, London School of Economics, London, UK.
Aki TsuchiyaSchool of Health and Related Research (ScHARR) and the Department of Economics, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Mark SculpherCentre for Health Economics, Alcuin a Block, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In most societies, resources are distributed by individuals acting in markets and by governments through some form of collective decision-making process. Economic evaluation offers a set of tools to inform collective decisions by examining the resource requirements and outcomes of alternative policies. The 'societal perspective' has been advocated, but less consideration has been given to what this should include and its practical implementation. This paper presents a framework for economic evaluation of policies with costs and outcomes falling on different sectors (e.g. health, criminal justice, education) and involving different decision makers. It extends the 'impact inventory' developed by the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine by considering all affected individuals and reflecting how outcomes attributed to an intervention can be compared with outcomes forgone as a result of resources not being available for other purposes. The framework sets out the series of assessments to be made, distinguishing points at which value judgements feed into the evaluation, and the implications of alternative judgements. These assessments reflect the institutional arrangements of public bodies, for example, their funding, the outcomes they consider important and their relative valuations of these outcomes. By avoiding the use of an abstract 'societal perspective', the contribution of the framework is to inform multiple decision makers with different objectives and provide practical guidance on overall societal impact.

Indexed as

Decision MakingCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth Care CostsHealth Care RationingHealth Care SectorHumansResource AllocationSocial Values

Identifiers

PMID31098947
PMCPMC6748888

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.