Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37980329›Full record

ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2024

Local Level Economic Evaluation: What is it? What is its Value? Is it Sustainable?

Jonathan Karnon, Andrew Partington, Jodi Gray, Aubyn Pincombe, Timothy Schultz

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jonathan KarnonFlinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia. jonathan.karnon@flinders.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-3220-2099
Andrew PartingtonFlinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2580-3355
Jodi GrayFlinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1119-7078
Aubyn PincombeFlinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4807-0668
Timothy SchultzFlinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1419-3328
Flinders University · AU

Funding

Medical Research Future Fund (AU) 9100005National Health and Medical Research Council 9100002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In Australia, local health services with allocated budgets manage public hospital services for defined geographical areas. The authors were embedded in a local health service for around 2 years and undertook a range of local level economic evaluations for which three decision contexts were defined: intervention development, post-implementation and prioritisation. Despite difficulties in estimating opportunity costs and in the relevance of portfolio-based prioritisation approaches, economic evaluation added value to local decision-making. Development-focused (ex ante) economic evaluations used expert elicitation and calibration methods to synthesise published evidence with local health systems data to evaluate interventions to prevent hospital acquired complications. The use of economic evaluation facilitated the implementation of interventions with additional resource requirements. Decision analytic models were used alongside the implementation of larger scale, more complex service interventions to estimate counterfactual patient pathways, costs and outcomes, providing a transparent alternative to the statistical analyses of intervention effects, which were subject to high risk of bias. Economic evaluations of more established services had less impact due to data limitations and lesser executive interest. Prioritisation-focused economic evaluations compared costs, outcomes and processes of care for defined patient populations across alternative local health services to identify, understand and quantify the effects of unwarranted variation to inform priority areas for improvement within individual local health services. The sustained use of local level economic evaluation could be supported by embedding health economists in local continuous improvement units, perhaps with an initial focus on supporting the development and evaluation of prioritised new service interventions. Shared resources and critical mass are important, which could be facilitated through groups of embedded economists with joint appointments between different local health services and the same academic institution.

Indexed as

Health ServicesResearch DesignAustraliaCost-Benefit AnalysisHumans

Identifiers

PMID37980329
OpenAlexW4388790859

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.