IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Identifying and controlling for program-level differences in comparative cost analysis: Lessons from the economic evaluation of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program

Listed author(s):
  • Subramanian, Sujha
  • Ekwueme, Donatus U.
  • Gardner, James G.
  • Bapat, Bela
  • Kramer, Caren
Registered author(s):

    Performing economic evaluations of established health care programs is essential to identify and control for underlying program-level variations and to make valid comparisons. At a time when the need for such evaluations is growing, health care professionals have limited information on the methodological challenges of performing these evaluations. In this study, we used the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program to illustrate these potential underlying variations. We performed site visits to four grantees and collected activity-based cost data from nine additional representative programs. We identified five specific types of cost factors that should be considered when evaluating and comparing health care programs: clinical services, service mix, in-kind contributions, indirect costs, and year-to-year expenditures of specific activities. A key lesson is that case studies and pilot testing should be performed before initiating cost analysis to identify underlying variation and to test appropriate methods to adequately control for these differences.

    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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Evaluation and Program Planning.

    Volume (Year): 31 (2008)
    Issue (Month): 2 (May)
    Pages: 136-144

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:31:y:2008:i:2:p:136-144
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:31:y:2008:i:2:p:136-144. 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: (Dana Niculescu)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.