A New Outcome Measure For Cost-Utility Analyses Of Screening Programs
In this paper we provide a new outcome measure for the cost-utility analyses of alternative screening programs of a particular disease. We show that for non-invasive screening programs satisfying plausible assumptions, QALYs can be replaced by a simpler outcome: the sensitivity of the program. In other words, the cost-utility analysis can be made without computing the utility each program offers. Consequently, results would be immune to two of the most controversial issues in the cost-utility analysis approach: the elicitation method to obtain quality weights of health profiles, and the discount rate for future health benefits. The assumptions are particularly suitable in the case of selecting between the universal and the selective implementation of a non-invasive screening program. Therefore, we apply our result to provide an additional viewpoint in the current debate about the implementation of a universal or selective newborn screening program to detect congenital hearing impairment.
|Date of creation:||Jul 2003|
|Publication status:||Published by Ivie|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: C/ Guardia Civil, 22, Esc 2a, 1o, E-46020 VALENCIA|
Phone: +34 96 319 00 50
Fax: +34 96 319 00 55
Web page: http://www.ivie.es/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Carmen Herrero Blanco & Juan D. Moreno Ternero, 2002. "Economic Evaluation Of Newborn Hearing Screening Procedures," Working Papers. Serie AD 2002-06, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
- Carmen Herrero & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2005. "Hospital costs and social cost: A case study of newborn hearing screening," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 29(1), pages 203-216, January.
- Birch, Stephen & Gafni, Amiram, 1992. "Cost effectiveness/utility analyses : Do current decision rules lead us to where we want to be?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 279-296, October.
- Johannesson, Magnus & Weinstein, Milton C., 1993. "On the decision rules of cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 459-467, December.
- Bleichrodt, Han & Gafni, Amiram, 1996. "Time preference, the discounted utility model and health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 49-66, February.
- Marjon M. Van Der Pol & John A. Cairns, 2000. "Negative and zero time preference for health," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(2), pages 171-175.
- Bleichrodt, Han & Johannesson, Magnus, 1997. "Standard gamble, time trade-off and rating scale: Experimental results on the ranking properties of QALYs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 155-175, April.