IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v14y2013i2p221-230.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An analysis of the influence of framework aspects on the study design of health economic modeling evaluations

Author

Listed:
  • Sebastian Gurtner

Abstract

Research and practical guidelines have many implications for how to structure a health economic study. A major focus in recent decades has been the quality of health economic research. In practice, the factors influencing a study design are not limited to the quest for quality. Moreover, the framework of the study is important. This research addresses three major questions related to these framework aspects. First, we want to know whether the design of health economic studies has changed over time. Second, we want to know how the subject of a study, whether it is a process or product innovation, influences the parameters of the study design. Third, one of the most important questions we will answer is whether and how the study’s source of funding has an impact on the design of the research. To answer these questions, a total of 234 health economic studies were analyzed using a correspondence analysis and a logistic regression analysis. All three categories of framework factors have an influence on the aspects of the study design. Health economic studies have evolved over time, leading to the use of more advanced methods like complex sensitivity analyses. Additionally, the patient’s point of view has increased in importance. The evaluation of product innovations has focused more on utility concepts. On the other hand, the source of funding may influence only a few aspects of the study design, such as the use of evaluation methods, the source of data, and the use of certain utility measures. The most important trends in health care, such as the emphasis on the patients’ point of view, become increasingly established in health economic evaluations with the passage of time. Although methodological challenges remain, modern information and communication technologies provide a basis for increasing the complexity and quality of health economic studies if used frequently. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Sebastian Gurtner, 2013. "An analysis of the influence of framework aspects on the study design of health economic modeling evaluations," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(2), pages 221-230, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:14:y:2013:i:2:p:221-230
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-011-0363-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10198-011-0363-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-011-0363-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Andrew Briggs & Mark Sculpher & Martin Buxton, 1994. "Uncertainty in the economic evaluation of health care technologies: The role of sensitivity analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 3(2), pages 95-104, March.
    2. Eddy Adang, 2008. "Economic evaluation of innovative technologies in health care should include a short-run perspective," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(4), pages 381-384, November.
    3. Cookson, Richard & Hutton, John, 2003. "Regulating the economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals and medical devices: a European perspective," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 167-178, February.
    4. Susan Griffin & Helen Weatherly & Gerry Richardson & Mike Drummond, 2008. "Methodological issues in undertaking independent cost-effectiveness analysis for NICE: the case of therapies for ADHD," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(2), pages 137-145, May.
    5. Sugden, Robert & Williams, Alan, 1978. "The Principles of Practical Cost-Benefit Analysis," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198770411.
    6. Xin Sun & Thomas Faunce, 2008. "Decision-analytical modelling in health-care economic evaluations," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(4), pages 313-323, November.
    7. Hartunian, N.S. & Smart, C.N. & Thompson, M.S., 1980. "The incidence and economic costs of cancer, motor vehicle injuries, coronary heart disease, and stroke: A comparative analysis," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 70(12), pages 1249-1260.
    8. Sloan,Frank A. (ed.), 1996. "Valuing Health Care," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521576468, November.
    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. Bogdan STOICA & Alexandru Mihai BUGHEANU, 2018. "National Health Systems and Healthcare Contracts in the EU: a Review on the Literature over the Last 17 Years," Management and Economics Review, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 3(2), pages 202-212, December.

    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. Mark S. Thompson, 1983. "Health Versus Money," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 3(3), pages 285-297, August.
    2. Peter Mackie & John Nellthorp & James Laird, 2005. "Treatment of Induced Traffic," World Bank Publications - Reports 11796, The World Bank Group.
    3. Martin J. Buxton & Michael F. Drummond & Ben A. Van Hout & Richard L. Prince & Trevor A. Sheldon & Thomas Szucs & Muriel Vray, 1997. "Modelling in Ecomomic Evaluation: An Unavoidable Fact of Life," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 217-227, May.
    4. Goswami, Indranil & Urminsky, Oleg, 2021. "Don’t fear the meter: How longer time limits bias managers to prefer hiring with flat fee compensation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 42-58.
    5. Lin, Tun & De Guzman, Franklin, 2007. "Tourism for pro-poor and sustainable growth: economic analysis of tourism projects," MPRA Paper 24994, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Isaac Corro Ramos & Maureen P. M. H. Rutten-van Mölken & Maiwenn J. Al, 2013. "The Role of Value-of-Information Analysis in a Health Care Research Priority Setting," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(4), pages 472-489, May.
    7. Donald F. Vitaliano, 1992. "An economic assessment of the social costs of highway salting and the efficiency of substituting a new deicing material," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(3), pages 397-418.
    8. Anthony Boardman & Shaun Hargreaves-Heap, 1999. "Network Externalities and Government Restrictions on Satellite Broadcasting of Key Sporting Events," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 23(3), pages 165-179, August.
    9. Andronis, Lazaros & Maredza, Mandy & Petrou, Stavros, 2019. "Measuring, valuing and including forgone childhood education and leisure time costs in economic evaluation: Methods, challenges and the way forward," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 237(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Furmanov, Kirill & Chernysheva, Irina, 2012. "Health and job search in Russia," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 26(2), pages 62-91.
    11. John Hutton, 2012. "‘Health Economics’ and the evolution of economic evaluation of health technologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(1), pages 13-18, January.
    12. Adang, Eddy M.M. & Wensing, Michel, 2008. "Economic barriers to implementation of innovations in health care: Is the long run-short run efficiency discrepancy a paradox?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(2-3), pages 236-242, December.
    13. Ruediger Rackwitz, 2004. "Optimal and Acceptable Technical Facilities Involving Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 675-695, June.
    14. Hultkrantz, Lars & Svensson, Mikael, 2012. "A Comparison of Benefit Cost and Cost Utility Analysis in Practice: Divergent Policies in Sweden," Working Papers 2012:5, Örebro University, School of Business.
    15. Gijs Wetering & Willem Woertman & Andre Verbeek & Mireille Broeders & Eddy Adang, 2013. "Quantifying short run cost-effectiveness during a gradual implementation process," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(6), pages 911-918, December.
    16. Marco Grasso, 2004. "Utilizzo e diffusione della valutazione economica dei beni," Others 0406002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Bengt Jönsson, 2006. "Time for a common standard for cost-effectiveness in Europe?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 7(4), pages 223-224, December.
    18. Pauline Chauvin & Jean-Michel Josselin & Denis Heresbach, 2014. "The influence of waiting times on cost-effectiveness: a case study of colorectal cancer mass screening," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(8), pages 801-812, November.
    19. Anthony Ogus, 1998. "Regulatory Appraisal: A Neglected Opportunity for Law and Economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 53-68, July.
    20. Rashidah T Uthman & Andrew J Sutton & Louise J Jackson & Olalekan A Uthman, 2018. "Does directly administered antiretroviral therapy represent good value for money in sub-Saharan Africa? A cost-utility and value of information analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Health economic evaluation; Financing; Evolution; Framework; I10; I18;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    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:spr:eujhec:v:14:y:2013:i:2:p:221-230. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.