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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Sugden, Robert & Williams, Alan, 1978. "The Principles of Practical Cost-Benefit Analysis," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198770411.
    5. 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.
    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. 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.
    8. Sloan,Frank A. (ed.), 1996. "Valuing Health Care," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521576468.
    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. Joanne Lord & Maxwell A. Asante, 1999. "Estimating uncertainty ranges for costs by the bootstrap procedure combined with probabilistic sensitivity analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(4), pages 323-333, June.
    3. Berger, Loïc & Bleichrodt, Han & Eeckhoudt, Louis, 2013. "Treatment decisions under ambiguity," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 559-569.
    4. van Hulsen, Merel A.J. & Rohde, Kirsten I.M. & van Exel, Job, 2023. "Preferences for investment in and allocation of additional healthcare capacity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 320(C).
    5. Simon Wieser & Bruno Horisberger & Sara Schmidhauser & Claudia Eisenring & Urs Brügger & Andreas Ruckstuhl & Jürg Dietrich & Anne Mannion & Achim Elfering & Özgür Tamcan & Urs Müller, 2011. "Cost of low back pain in Switzerland in 2005," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 12(5), pages 455-467, October.
    6. Peter Mackie & John Nellthorp & James Laird, 2005. "Treatment of Induced Traffic," World Bank Publications - Reports 11796, The World Bank Group.
    7. Susie El Saadany & Douglas Coyle & Antonio Giulivi & Mohammad Afzal, 2005. "Economic burden of hepatitis C in Canada and the potential impact of prevention," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 6(2), pages 159-165, June.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Sowmya Dhanaraj, 2014. "Health Shocks and Coping Strategies: State Health Insurance Scheme of Andhra Pradesh, India," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2014-003, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    12. Jurgita Baranauskiene & Valdemaras Makutenas & Albina Novosinskiene, 2014. "What Are Left Underestimated Using Cost-Benefit Analysis For Public Project Evaluation?," Economy & Business Journal, International Scientific Publications, Bulgaria, vol. 8(1), pages 856-867.
    13. Mahesh D. Pandey & Jatin S. Nathwani, 2003. "Canada Wide Standard for Particulate Matter and Ozone: Cost‐Benefit Analysis Using a Life Quality Index," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1), pages 55-67, February.
    14. Currie, Janet & Stabile, Mark & Jones, Lauren, 2014. "Do stimulant medications improve educational and behavioral outcomes for children with ADHD?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 58-69.
    15. Hanna Gyllensten & Michael Wiberg & Kristina Alexanderson & Anders Norlund & Emilie Friberg & Jan Hillert & Olivia Ernstsson & Petter Tinghög, 2018. "Costs of illness of multiple sclerosis in Sweden: a population-based register study of people of working age," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(3), pages 435-446, April.
    16. 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.
    17. Rich, Jeppe & Nielsen, Otto Anker, 2007. "A socio-economic assessment of proposed road user charging schemes in Copenhagen," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 330-345, July.
    18. 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.
    19. Joseph H. Cook, 2013. "Principles and standards for benefit–cost analysis of public health preparedness and pandemic mitigation programs," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 3, pages 110-152, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Culyer, Anthony J. & Evans, Robert G., 1996. "Mark Pauly on welfare economics: Normative rabbits from positive hats," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 243-251, April.

    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.