Discounting and cost-effectiveness in NICE - stepping back to sort out a confusion
Abstract
Brouwer and colleagues [1] argue that the reasons for specifying an equal discount rate for health outcomes and costs in the recent guidance on methods of technology appraisal issued by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) [2] is both opaque and wrong. They argue that a lower rate should apply to health outcomes like QALYs. It is also claimed that the guidance on discounting represents a step backwards, that is both inconsistent with current theoretical insights and will prejudice the outcome of cost-effectiveness studies of preventive interventions. The reasoning behind the use of equal discount rates for costs and health outcomes is indeed not well developed in the published guidance. Nor does it reflect the debate that underpinned the guidance. We therefore welcome the opportunity to explain more completely the rationale in the minds of the principal authors of the current guidance. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Download Info
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.Bibliographic Info
Article provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Health Economics.
Volume (Year): 15 (2006)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Pages: 1-4
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749
Related research
Keywords:References
References listed on IDEASPlease report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Grossman, Michael, 1972. "On the Concept of Health Capital and the Demand for Health," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(2), pages 223-55, March-Apr.
- Hugh Gravelle & Dave Smith, 2001. "Discounting for health effects in cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(7), pages 587-599.
- Aarof A. Stinnett & John Mullahy, 1998. "Net Health Benefits: A New Framework for the Analysis of Uncertainty in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," NBER Technical Working Papers 0227, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Garber, Alan M. & Phelps, Charles E., 1997. "Economic foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 1-31, February.
Citations
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.Cited by:
- Baal, P.H. van & Feenstra, T.L. & Polder, J.J. & Hoogenveen, R.T. & Brouwer, W., 2011.
"Economic evaluation and the postponement of health care costs,"
Open Access publications from Tilburg University
urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-4111890, Tilburg University.
- Pieter H. M. van Baal & Talitha L. Feenstra & Johan J. Polder & Rudolf T. Hoogenveen & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2011. "Economic evaluation and the postponement of health care costs," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(4), pages 432-445, April.
- Hugh Gravelle & Werner Brouwer & Louis Niessen & Maarten Postma & Frans Rutten, 2007. "Discounting in economic evaluations: stepping forward towards optimal decision rules," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(3), pages 307-317.
- Mike Paulden & Anthony J. Culyer, 2010. "Does Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Discriminate against Patients with Short Life Expectancy?," Working Paper Series 41_10, The Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis.
- Mareike Schad & Jürgen John, 2012. "Towards a social discount rate for the economic evaluation of health technologies in Germany: an exploratory analysis," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 127-144, April.
- Kontodimopoulos, Nick & Niakas, Dimitris, 2008. "An estimate of lifelong costs and QALYs in renal replacement therapy based on patients' life expectancy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 85-96, April.
- Mike Paulden & Anthony J Culyer, 2010. "Does cost-effectiveness analysis discriminate against patients with short life expectancy? Matters of logic and matters of context," Working Papers 055cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:15:y:2006:i:1:p:1-4For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.