This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Discounting in economic evaluations: stepping forward towards optimal decision rules

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Hugh Gravelle (National Primary Care Research and Development Centre (NPCRDC), Centre for Health Economics, University of York, UK)
Werner Brouwer (Department of Health Policy & Management and Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus Medical Centre | Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands)
Louis Niessen (Department of Health Policy & Management and Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus Medical Centre | Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands)
Maarten Postma (Groningen University Institute for Drug Exploration | University of Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy (GUIDE|GRIP), The Netherlands)
Frans Rutten (Department of Health Policy & Management and Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus Medical Centre | Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

The National Institute for Clinical Excellence has recently changed its guidelines on discounting costs and effects in economic evaluations. In common with most other regulatory bodies it now requires that health effects should be discounted at the same rate as costs. We show that the guideline leads to sub-optimal decisions because it fails to account for the changing value of health. NICE (and other regulatory bodies) should either use differential discounting or stipulate how the changing value of health should otherwise be dealt with. We also show how binding health service budget constraints should be incorporated in evaluations. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/hec.1168
File Format: text/html
File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Article provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Health Economics.

Volume (Year): 16 (2007)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 307-317
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:16:y:2007:i:3:p:307-317

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please 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.:
  1. 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. [Downloadable!]
  2. Ben A. Van Hout, 1998. "Discounting costs and effects: a reconsideration," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(7), pages 581-594.
  3. Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher & Anthony Culyer & Chris McCabe & Andrew Briggs & Ron Akehurst & Martin Buxton & John Brazier, 2006. "Discounting and cost-effectiveness in NICE - stepping back to sort out a confusion," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(1), pages 1-4. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please 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.)

  1. Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher & Tony Culyer, 2007. "Mark versus Luke? Appropriate Methods for the Evaluation of Public Health Interventions," Working Papers 031cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York. [Downloadable!]
  2. Mike Paulden & Karl Claxton, 2009. "Budget allocation and the revealed social rate of time preference for health," Working Papers 053cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You may want to explore EconPapers, which displays the same data as IDEAS in a different way.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-13.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.