ArticlePharmacoEconomics2023
Accounting for Nonhealth and Future Costs in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Distributional Impacts of a US Cancer Prevention Strategy.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo provide up-to-date and comprehensive US data tables to estimate future net resource use, including nonlabor market production, and examine distributional impacts of including nonhealth and future costs in cost-effectiveness results.
methodsUsing a published US cancer prevention simulation model, the paper evaluated the lifetime cost effectiveness of implementing a 10% excise tax on processed meats across age- and sex-specific population subgroups. The model examined multiple scenarios accounting for cancer-related healthcare expenditure (HCE) only, cancer-related and unrelated background HCE, adding productivity benefits (i.e., patient time, cancer-related productivity loss, and background labor and nonlabor market production), and with nonhealth consumption costs, adjusted for household economies of scale. Additional analyses include using population-average versus age-sex-specific estimates for quantifying production and consumption value, as well as comparing direct model estimation versus postcorrections with Meltzer's approximation for incorporating future resource use.
resultsAccounting for nonhealth and future costs impacted cost-effectiveness results across population subgroups, often leading to changes in "cost-saving" determination. Including nonlabor market production had a noticeable impact on estimating future resource use and reduced the bias toward undervaluing productivity among females and older populations. The use of age-sex-specific estimates resulted in less favorable cost-effectiveness results compared with population-average estimates. Meltzer's approximation provided reasonable corrections among the middle-aged population for re-engineering cost-effectiveness ratios from a healthcare sector to a societal perspective.
conclusionWith updated US data tables, this paper can help researchers conduct a comprehensive value assessment to reflect net resource use (health and nonhealth resource use minus production value) from a societal perspective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.