IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v46y1999i2p143-157.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research into the use of health economics in decision making in the United Kingdom--Phase II: Is health economics `for good or evil'?

Author

Listed:
  • Duthie, Tessa
  • Trueman, Paul
  • Chancellor, Jeremy
  • Diez, Lara

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Duthie, Tessa & Trueman, Paul & Chancellor, Jeremy & Diez, Lara, 1999. "Research into the use of health economics in decision making in the United Kingdom--Phase II: Is health economics `for good or evil'?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 143-157, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:46:y:1999:i:2:p:143-157
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168-8510(98)00057-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mike Drummond & Jonathan Cooke & Tom Walley, 1996. "Economic evaluation in health care decision making: evidence from the UK," Working Papers 148chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    2. Alban, Anita, 1994. "The role of economic appraisal in Denmark," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 1647-1652, June.
    3. Douglas Coyle, 1993. "Increasing the impact of economic evaluations on health care decision-making," Working Papers 108chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    4. Drummond, Michael & Cooke, Jonathan & Walley, Tom, 1997. "Economic evaluation under managed competition: Evidence from the U.K," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 583-595, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:bla:ijhplm:v:32:y:2017:i:2:p:e232-e260 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Hoffmann, Christiane AU -, 2000. "The influence of economic evaluation studies on decision making.: A European survey," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 179-192, July.
    3. Hodgetts, Katherine & Elshaug, Adam G. & Hiller, Janet E., 2012. "What counts and how to count it: Physicians’ constructions of evidence in a disinvestment context," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2191-2199.
    4. Gregory Merlo & Katie Page & Julie Ratcliffe & Kate Halton & Nicholas Graves, 2015. "Bridging the Gap: Exploring the Barriers to Using Economic Evidence in Healthcare Decision Making and Strategies for Improving Uptake," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 303-309, June.
    5. Eddama, Oya & Coast, Joanna, 2008. "A systematic review of the use of economic evaluation in local decision-making," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(2-3), pages 129-141, May.
    6. Williams, Iestyn & Bryan, Stirling, 2007. "Understanding the limited impact of economic evaluation in health care resource allocation: A conceptual framework," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 135-143, January.
    7. Stirling Bryan & Iestyn Williams & Shirley McIver, 2007. "Seeing the NICE side of cost-effectiveness analysis: a qualitative investigation of the use of CEA in NICE technology appraisals," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(2), pages 179-193.
    8. Legood, Rosa & Wolstenholme, Jane & Gray, Alastair, 2009. "From cost-effectiveness information to decision-making on liquid-based cytology: Mind the gap," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 193-200, February.
    9. Williams, Iestyn P. & Bryan, Stirling, 2007. "Cost-effectiveness analysis and formulary decision making in England: Findings from research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(10), pages 2116-2129, November.
    10. Lessard, Chantale, 2007. "Complexity and reflexivity: Two important issues for economic evaluation in health care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(8), pages 1754-1765, April.
    11. Hasle-Pham, Elodie & Arnould, Benoit & Spath, Hans-Martin & Follet, Alain & Duru, Gerard & Marquis, Patrick, 2005. "Role of clinical, patient-reported outcome and medico-economic studies in the public hospital drug formulary decision-making process: results of a European survey," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 205-212, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:46:y:1999:i:2:p:143-157. 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) or (). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.