Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34713421›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2022

Future Offspring Costs in Economic Evaluation.

Evelyn Verbeke, Jeroen Luyten

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Evelyn VerbekeLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. evelyn.verbeke@kuleuven.be.ORCID 0000-0001-9520-3991
Jeroen LuytenLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-6398-4025

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Economic evaluation guidelines increasingly prescribe inclusion of all future costs. We point at an important dimension of future costs that is systematically neglected. Healthcare can affect future offspring, either through affecting the patient's fertility or through determining future offspring's health. As we show, the future costs associated with these changes can be substantial and will vary across interventions and demographic groups. However, systematic inclusion of these future offspring costs would raise many problems on its own. Based on the population ethics concept of necessitarianism, we suggest that only those future costs that spring from 'necessary' future lives should be included in future cost calculations, while all costs associated with 'potential' future lives can be ignored. This approach allows excluding most future offspring costs and avoids skewed cost-effectiveness outcomes of interventions with fertility effects, while taking into account the economic implications of preventing disease in future generations that will exist by necessity. Overall, future generations expose a substantial gap in today's Health Technology Assessment (HTA) methodology and further discussion of the issues they raise is needed.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth ServicesHumansResearch Design

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.