The Pragmatist's Guide to Comparative Effectiveness Research
Following an acrimonious healthcare reform debate involving charges of "death panels," in 2010, Congress explicitly forbade the use of cost-effectiveness analysis in government programs of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In this context, comparative effectiveness research emerged as an alternative strategy to understand better what works in health care. Put simply, comparative effectiveness research compares the efficacy of two or more diagnostic tests, treatments, or health care delivery methods without any explicit consideration of costs . To economists, the omission of costs from an assessment might seem nonsensical, but we argue that comparative effectiveness research still holds promise. First, it sidesteps one problem facing cost-effectiveness analysis—the widespread political resistance to the idea of using prices in health care. Second, there is little or no evidence on comparative effectiveness for a vast array of treatments: for example, we don't know whether proton-beam therapy, a very expensive treatment for prostate cancer (which requires building a cyclotron and a facility the size of a football field) offers any advantage over conventional approaches. Most drug studies compare new drugs to placebos, rather than "head-to-head" with other drugs on the market, leaving a vacuum as to which drug works best. Finally, the comparative effectiveness research can prove a useful first step even in the absence of cost information if it provides key estimates of treatment effects. After all, such effects are typically expensive to determine and require years or even decades of data. Costs are much easier to measure, and can be appended at a later date as financial Armageddon draws closer.
Volume (Year): 25 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (Spring)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: https://www.aeaweb.org/jep/|
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: https://www.aeaweb.org/subscribe.html|
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.:
- 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.
- DiMasi, Joseph A. & Hansen, Ronald W. & Grabowski, Henry G., 2003. "The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 151-185, March.
- Amitabh Chandra & Douglas O. Staiger, 2007. "Productivity Spillovers in Health Care: Evidence from the Treatment of Heart Attacks," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115, pages 103-140.
- Katherine Baicker & Jonathan Skinner, 2010.
"Health Care Spending Growth and the Future of U.S. Tax Rates,"
in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 25, pages 39-67
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Katherine Baicker & Jonathan Skinner, 2011. "Health Care Spending Growth and the Future of U.S. Tax Rates," Tax Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(1), pages 39 - 68.
- Katherine Baicker & Jonathan S. Skinner, 2011. "Health Care Spending Growth and the Future of U.S. Tax Rates," NBER Working Papers 16772, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Anupam Jena & Tomas Philipson, 2009. "Endogenous Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Health Care Technology Adoption," NBER Working Papers 15032, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Meltzer, David, 1997. "Accounting for future costs in medical cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 33-64, February.
- Basu, Anirban & Jena, Anupam B. & Philipson, Tomas J., 2011.
"The impact of comparative effectiveness research on health and health care spending,"
Journal of Health Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 695-706, July.
- Anirban Basu & Tomas J. Philipson, 2010. "The Impact of Comparative Effectiveness Research on Health and Health Care Spending," NBER Working Papers 15633, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Douglas Almond & Joseph J. Doyle & Amanda E. Kowalski & Heidi Williams, 2010.
"Estimating Marginal Returns to Medical Care: Evidence from At-risk Newborns,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
Oxford University Press, vol. 125(2), pages 591-634.
- Douglas Almond & Joseph J. Doyle, Jr. & Amanda E. Kowalski & Heidi Williams, 2008. "Estimating Marginal Returns to Medical Care: Evidence from At-Risk Newborns," NBER Working Papers 14522, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Nord, Erik & Richardson, Jeff & Street, Andrew & Kuhse, Helga & Singer, Peter, 1995. "Who cares about cost? Does economic analysis impose or reflect social values?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 79-94, November.
- David Meltzer, 1997. "Accounting for Future Costs in Medical Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," NBER Working Papers 5946, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aea:jecper:v:25:y:2011:i:2:p:27-46. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jane Voros)or (Michael P. Albert)
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.