Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40713845›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2025

Efficiency in health care: connecting economic evaluations with implementation objectives.

Todd H Wagner, Ties Hoomans, Ramzi G Salloum, Douglas E Levy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Todd H WagnerHealth Economics Resouce Center, US Department of Veterans Affairs, Menlo Park, USA. twagner@stanford.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7625-3504
Ties HoomansCare Policy and Evaluation Centre (CPEC) at the London School of Economics and Political Science, London, England.
Ramzi G SalloumDivision Director for Implementation Science in the Department of Health Outcomes & Biomedical Informatics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, USA.
Douglas E LevyHarvard Medical School and the Mongan Institute Health Policy Research Center at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA.

Funding

Using social networks to map and evaluate team science across CTSA hubsUL1TR001427 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI MITCHELL, DUANE A. · 2015 to 2024
$37.2M
Transforming health equity rhetoric to rigor: Development and validation of a novel measure assessing health equity in implementation of health interventionsP50DA054072 · NIDA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Mark P McGovern · 2022 to 2026
$18.1M
The Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control Equity - Research ProgramP50CA244433 · NCI · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI EMMONS, KAREN M. · 2019 to 2023
$12.5M
Clinical and Translational Science Institute, University of Florida UL1TR001427Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control Equity at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health P50CA244433Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse P50DA054072NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001427NCI NIH HHS P50 CA244433NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA054072Veterans Administration Medical Center RCS-17-154
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEconomic evaluations are helpful for efficient resource use. This paper aims to clarify the relationship between economic evaluation methods and two types of health care efficiency, aiding implementation scientists in selecting the appropriate approach for their research.

methodsWe clarify the connection between cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and allocative efficiency, and explain how budget impact analysis (BIA) more closely connects with productive efficiency. We also discuss other methods that researchers can use to analyze an organization's productive efficiency, given increasing pressure for health care organizations to be efficient.

resultsAllocative efficiency seeks to maximize social welfare through optimal resource distribution. Productive efficiency focuses on an organization's ability to maximize its output given its resource constraints. CEA, particularly when incorporating a societal perspective, assesses allocative efficiency. BIA, which often has a short time horizon and more focused perspective, assesses productive efficiency. When organizational leaders ask implementation scientists for an economic evaluation, it is important to determine whether they want a CEA or a BIA, given they answer different questions, often employing different methods. We also present other methods for measuring efficiency and causes of inefficiency stemming from fixed costs, scale, scope, regulations, labor, and decision-making.

conclusionsImplementation scientists must recognize that CEA and BIA serve distinct purposes and are not interchangeable. Choosing the right economic evaluation tool is crucial for answering specific research questions and building research teams. Future implementation work will also need to measure efficiency so that it is sustainable.

Indexed as

Behavioral economicsCostsEconomies of scaleEfficiencyProductivityWaste

Identifiers

PMID40713845
PMCPMC12296606

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.