IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v64y2007i8p1754-1765.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Complexity and reflexivity: Two important issues for economic evaluation in health care

Author

Listed:
  • Lessard, Chantale

Abstract

Economic evaluations are analytic techniques to assess the relative costs and consequences of health care programmes and technologies. Their role is to provide rigorous data to inform the health care decision-making process. Economic evaluation may oversimplify complex health care decisions. These analyses often ignore important health consequences, contextual elements, relationships or other relevant modifying factors, which might not be appropriate in a multi-objective, multi-stakeholder issue. One solution would be to develop a new paradigm based on the issues of perspective and context. Complexity theory may provide a useful conceptual framework for economic evaluation in health care. Complexity thinking develops an awareness of issues including uncertainty, contextual issues, multiple perspectives, broader societal involvement, and transdisciplinarity. This points the economic evaluation field towards an accountability and epistemology based on pluralism and uncertainty, requiring new forms of lay-expert engagement and roles of lay knowledge into decision-making processes. This highlights the issue of reflexivity in economic evaluation in health care. A reflexive approach would allow economic evaluators to analyze how objective structures and subjective elements influence their practices. In return, this would point increase the integrity and reliability of economic evaluations. Reflexivity provides opportunities for critically thinking about the organization and activities of the intellectual field, and perhaps the potential of moving in new, creative directions. This paper argues for economic evaluators to have a less positivist attitude towards what is useful knowledge, and to use more imagination about the data and methodologies they use.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:64:y:2007:i:8:p:1754-1765
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(06)00635-6
    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. Drummond, Michael, 1994. "Evaluation of health technology: Economic issues for health policy and policy issues for economic appraisal," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 1593-1600, June.
    2. Moatti, J. P. & Chanut, C. & Benech, J. M., 1994. "Researcher-driven versus policy-driven economic appraisal of health technologies: The case of France," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 1625-1633, June.
    3. Trevor A. Sheldon, 1996. "Problems of using modelling in the economic evaluation of health care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(1), pages 1-11, January.
    4. Clark, Jack A. & Potter, Deborah A. & McKinlay, John B., 1991. "Bringing social structure back into clinical decision making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 853-866, January.
    5. Reinhardt, Uwe E., 1997. "Making economic evaluations respectable," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 555-562, August.
    6. repec:bla:ausecr:v:37:y:2004:i:1:p:3-11 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. 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.
    8. Mechanic, David, 1995. "Emerging trends in the application of the social sciences to health and medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 40(11), pages 1491-1496, June.
    9. Richardson, Jeff & McKie, John, 2005. "Empiricism, ethics and orthodox economic theory: what is the appropriate basis for decision-making in the health sector?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 265-275, January.
    10. Davies, Linda & Coyle, Douglas & Drummond, Michael & The EC Network on the Methodology of Economic Appraisal of Health Technology, 1994. "Current status of economic appraisal of health technology in the European community: Report of the network," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 1601-1607, June.
    11. Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39, February.
    12. Gatrell, Anthony C., 2005. "Complexity theory and geographies of health: a critical assessment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(12), pages 2661-2671, June.
    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. Anzoise, Valentina & Sardo, Stefania, 2016. "Dynamic systems and the role of evaluation: The case of the Green Communities project," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 162-172.
    2. Xiao, Yue & Zhao, Kun & Bishai, David M. & Peters, David H., 2013. "Essential drugs policy in three rural counties in China: What does a complexity lens add?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 220-228.
    3. Walton, Mat, 2014. "Applying complexity theory: A review to inform evaluation design," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 119-126.
    4. Brousselle, Astrid & Lessard, Chantale, 2011. "Economic evaluation to inform health care decision-making: Promise, pitfalls and a proposal for an alternative path," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(6), pages 832-839, March.
    5. Boxebeld, Sander & Geijsen, Tom & Tuit, Charlotte & Exel, Job van & Makady, Amr & Maes, Laurence & van Agthoven, Michel & Mouter, Niek, 2024. "Public preferences for the allocation of societal resources over different healthcare purposes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 341(C).
    6. Lessard, Chantale & Contandriopoulos, André-Pierre & Beaulieu, Marie-Dominique, 2010. "The role (or not) of economic evaluation at the micro level: Can Bourdieu's theory provide a way forward for clinical decision-making?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 1948-1956, June.
    7. Kerschner, Christian & Ehlers, Melf-Hinrich, 2016. "A framework of attitudes towards technology in theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 139-151.
    8. van der Geer, Eric & van Tuijl, Harrie F.J.M. & Rutte, Christel G., 2009. "Performance management in healthcare: Performance indicator development, task uncertainty, and types of performance indicators," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 1523-1530, November.
    9. Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39, February.

    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. 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.
    2. Shah, Koonal K., 2009. "Severity of illness and priority setting in healthcare: A review of the literature," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(2-3), pages 77-84, December.
    3. 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.
    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. Clive Pritchard, 1998. "Trends in Economic Evaluation," Briefing 000444, Office of Health Economics.
    6. Cappelen, Alexander W. & Norheim, Ole Frithjof, 2006. "Responsibility, fairness and rationing in health care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 312-319, May.
    7. Erik Nord, 2015. "Cost-Value Analysis of Health Interventions: Introduction and Update on Methods and Preference Data," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 89-95, February.
    8. Michaël Schwarzinger & Jean‐Louis Lanoë & Erik Nord & Isabelle Durand‐Zaleski, 2004. "Lack of multiplicative transitivity in person trade‐off responses," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(2), pages 171-181, February.
    9. Mira Johri & Laura J. Damschroder & Brian J. Zikmund‐Fisher & Peter A. Ubel, 2005. "The importance of age in allocating health care resources: does intervention‐type matter?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(7), pages 669-678, July.
    10. Banta, David, 2003. "The development of health technology assessment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 121-132, February.
    11. Hannigan, Ben, 2013. "Connections and consequences in complex systems: Insights from a case study of the emergence and local impact of crisis resolution and home treatment services," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 212-219.
    12. Anna García‐Altés, 2001. "Twenty years of health care economic analysis in Spain: are we doing well?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(8), pages 715-729, December.
    13. Fontanella, Cynthia A. & Early, Theresa J. & Phillips, Gary, 2008. "Need or availability? Modeling aftercare decisions for psychiatrically hospitalized adolescents," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 758-773, July.
    14. Mohammad Soltani Delgosha & Tahereh Saheb & Nastaran Hajiheydari, 0. "Modelling the Asymmetrical Relationships between Digitalisation and Sustainable Competitiveness: A Cross-Country Configurational Analysis," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-21.
    15. Rutten, Frans, 1996. "Economic evaluation and health care decision-making," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 215-229, June.
    16. Clark, Alexander M., 2013. "What are the components of complex interventions in healthcare? Theorizing approaches to parts, powers and the whole intervention," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 185-193.
    17. Peter A. Ubel & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel, 2000. "Societal value, the person trade‐off, and the dilemma of whose values to measure for cost‐effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(2), pages 127-136, March.
    18. Joanna Coast & Richard Smith & Paula Lorgelly, 2008. "Should the capability approach be applied in Health Economics?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(6), pages 667-670, June.
    19. W. Dominika Wranik & Liesl Gambold & Natasha Hanson & Adrian Levy, 2017. "The evolution of the cancer formulary review in Canada: Can centralization improve the use of economic evaluation?," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 232-260, April.
    20. Damschroder, Laura J. & Zikmund-Fisher, Brian J. & Ubel, Peter A., 2005. "The impact of considering adaptation in health state valuation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 267-277, July.

    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:64:y:2007:i:8:p:1754-1765. 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: 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.