IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v38y1994i12p1647-1652.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The role of economic appraisal in Denmark

Author

Listed:
  • Alban, Anita

Abstract

The numbers of economic appraisals conducted have been increasing during the last ten years in Denmark. This article involves 17 economic appraisals on specific health issues. Most of the studies use the cost-effectiveness approach. Cost appraising has only been conducted in five of the studies, three use the cost-benefit approach, and only one uses the cost-utility approach. Most of the studies have been directed at the policy level and only five have been directed at the clinical decision making level. The success of the individual economic appraisals is being assessed by looking at their ability to change behaviour among the decision makers according to the results obtained and by looking at their ability to enter the decision making process. However, as this article stresses, economic appraisals have also been used to introduce the economic appraisal approach as a way of thinking, as a road to efficiency, within the health services. This has led to the incorporation of economic appraisals into committee work at the National decision making level, the issuing of guidelines to local health authorities including efficiency, and to some acceptance of the efficiency term among health professionals.

Suggested Citation

  • Alban, Anita, 1994. "The role of economic appraisal in Denmark," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 1647-1652, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:38:y:1994:i:12:p:1647-1652
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(94)90066-3
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jan, Stephen, 2003. "A perspective on the analysis of credible commitment and myopia in health sector decision making," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 269-278, March.
    2. Gerard, Karen & Smoker, Irenie & Seymour, Janelle, 1999. "Raising the quality of cost-utility analyses: lessons learnt and still to learn," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 217-238, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Edward C. F. Wilson & Stuart J. Peacock & Danny Ruta, 2009. "Priority setting in practice: what is the best way to compare costs and benefits?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(4), pages 467-478, April.
    5. van den Heuvel, Wim J. A. & Wieringh, Roelof & van den Heuvel, Lisette P. M., 1997. "Utilisation of medical technology assessment in health policy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 211-222, December.
    6. Peacock, Stuart J. & Richardson, Jeff R.J. & Carter, Rob & Edwards, Diana, 2007. "Priority setting in health care using multi-attribute utility theory and programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 897-910, February.

    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:socmed:v:38:y:1994:i:12:p:1647-1652. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.