IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i18p6780-d414946.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

SEEP-CI: A Structured Economic Evaluation Process for Complex Health System Interventions

Author

Listed:
  • Jason Madan

    (Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK)

  • Meghan Bruce Kumar

    (Department of International Public Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool L3 5QA, UK
    MARCH Centre, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, UK)

  • Miriam Taegtmeyer

    (Department of International Public Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool L3 5QA, UK)

  • Edwine Barasa

    (Health Economics Research Unit, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi 00100, Kenya
    Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LG, UK)

  • Swaran Preet Singh

    (Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
    Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust, Coventry CV6 6NY, UK)

Abstract

The economic evaluation of health system interventions is challenging, and methods guidance on how to respond to these challenges is lacking. The REACHOUT consortium developed and evaluated complex interventions for community health program quality improvement in six countries in Africa and Asia. Reflecting on the challenges we faced in conducting an economic evaluation alongside REACHOUT, we developed a Structured Economic Evaluation Process for Complex Health System Interventions (SEEP-CI). The SEEP-CI aims to establish the threshold effect size that would justify investment in a complex intervention, and provide an assessment to a decision-maker of how likely it is that the intervention can achieve this impact. We illustrate how the SEEP-CI could have been applied to REACHOUT to identify outcomes where the intervention might have impact and causal mechanisms, through which that impact might occur, guide data collection by focusing on proximal outcomes most likely to illustrate the effectiveness of the intervention, identify the size of health gain required to justify investment in the intervention, and indicate the assumptions required to accept that such health gains are credible. Further research is required to determine the feasibility and acceptability of the SEEP-CI, and the contexts in which it could be used.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason Madan & Meghan Bruce Kumar & Miriam Taegtmeyer & Edwine Barasa & Swaran Preet Singh, 2020. "SEEP-CI: A Structured Economic Evaluation Process for Complex Health System Interventions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-12, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:18:p:6780-:d:414946
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/18/6780/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/18/6780/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Don Husereau & Michael Drummond & Stavros Petrou & Chris Carswell & David Moher & Dan Greenberg & Federico Augustovski & Andrew Briggs & Josephine Mauskopf & Elizabeth Loder, 2013. "Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) Statement," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 361-367, May.
    2. S Robinson, 2008. "Conceptual modelling for simulation Part I: definition and requirements," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(3), pages 278-290, March.
    3. Anna Vassall & Lindsay Mangham‐Jefferies & Gabriela B. Gomez & Catherine Pitt & Nicola Foster, 2016. "Incorporating Demand and Supply Constraints into Economic Evaluations in Low‐Income and Middle‐Income Countries," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(S1), pages 95-115, February.
    4. Meacock, Rachel, 2019. "Methods for the economic evaluation of changes to the organisation and delivery of health services: principal challenges and recommendations," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 119-134, January.
    5. Mingers, John & Rosenhead, Jonathan, 2004. "Problem structuring methods in action," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 530-554, February.
    6. Ackermann, Fran, 2012. "Problem structuring methods ‘in the Dock’: Arguing the case for Soft OR," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 652-658.
    7. S Robinson, 2008. "Conceptual modelling for simulation Part II: a framework for conceptual modelling," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(3), pages 291-304, March.
    8. Anna Vassall & Lindsay Mangham‐Jefferies & Gabriela B. Gomez & Catherine Pitt & Nicola Foster, 2016. "Incorporating Demand and Supply Constraints into Economic Evaluations in Low‐Income and Middle‐Income Countries," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25, pages 95-115, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alireza Moumivand & Adel Azar & Abbas Toloie Eshlaghy, 2022. "Combined soft system methodology and agent‐based simulation for multi‐methodological modelling," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 200-217, March.
    2. Elias Hartvigsson & Erik Oscar Ahlgren & Sverker Molander, 2020. "Tackling complexity and problem formulation in rural electrification through conceptual modelling in system dynamics," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 141-153, January.
    3. Gerrit Muller, 2021. "Applying Roadmapping and Conceptual Modeling to the Energy Transition: A Local Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-16, March.
    4. Gomes, Sharlene L. & Hermans, Leon M. & Thissen, Wil A.H., 2018. "Extending community operational research to address institutional aspects of societal problems: Experiences from peri-urban Bangladesh," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 904-917.
    5. Huajie Jin & Paul Tappenden & Stewart Robinson & Evanthia Achilla & David Aceituno & Sarah Byford, 2020. "Systematic review of the methods of health economic models assessing antipsychotic medication for schizophrenia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, July.
    6. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.
    7. Eden, Colin & Ackermann, Fran, 2018. "Theory into practice, practice to theory: Action research in method development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(3), pages 1145-1155.
    8. Michnik, Jerzy, 2013. "Weighted Influence Non-linear Gauge System (WINGS) – An analysis method for the systems of interrelated components," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 536-544.
    9. Eric Innocenti & Claudio Detotto & Corinne Idda & Dawn Cassandra Parker & Dominique Prunetti, 2023. "Spécification conceptuelle MR POTATOHEAD -Property Market Edition du système complexe d'un territoire touristique à deux marchés : application au territoire corse," Post-Print hal-04121402, HAL.
    10. Vanessa B. Schramm & Fernando Schramm, 2018. "An Approach for Supporting Problem Structuring in Water Resources Management and Planning," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(9), pages 2955-2968, July.
    11. Konsti-Laakso, Suvi & Rantala, Tero, 2018. "Managing community engagement: A process model for urban planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1040-1049.
    12. Small, Adrian & Wainwright, David, 2018. "Privacy and security of electronic patient records – Tailoring multimethodology to explore the socio-political problems associated with Role Based Access Control systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 344-360.
    13. Romm, Norma R.A., 2018. "Reflections on a multi-layered intervention in the South African public education system: Some ethical implications for Community Operational Research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 971-983.
    14. Brailsford, Sally C. & Eldabi, Tillal & Kunc, Martin & Mustafee, Navonil & Osorio, Andres F., 2019. "Hybrid simulation modelling in operational research: A state-of-the-art review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(3), pages 721-737.
    15. David Lowe & Louise Martingale & Mike Yearworth, 2016. "Guiding interventions in a multi-organisational context: combining the Viable System Model and Hierarchical Process Modelling for use as a Problem Structuring Method," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(12), pages 1481-1495, December.
    16. Chong, Adrian & Augenbroe, Godfried & Yan, Da, 2021. "Occupancy data at different spatial resolutions: Building energy performance and model calibration," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    17. Alberto Franco, L., 2013. "Rethinking Soft OR interventions: Models as boundary objects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 720-733.
    18. Yearworth, Mike & White, Leroy, 2013. "The uses of qualitative data in multimethodology: Developing causal loop diagrams during the coding process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 151-161.
    19. Gregory, Amanda J. & Atkins, Jonathan P. & Midgley, Gerald & Hodgson, Anthony M., 2020. "Stakeholder identification and engagement in problem structuring interventions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(1), pages 321-340.
    20. Durugbo, Christopher M., 2020. "Affordance-based problem structuring for workplace innovation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(2), pages 617-631.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:18:p:6780-:d:414946. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.