کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
7389173 | 1481047 | 2018 | 9 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله ISI
Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making-A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]
دانلود مقاله + سفارش ترجمه
دانلود مقاله ISI انگلیسی
رایگان برای ایرانیان
موضوعات مرتبط
علوم پزشکی و سلامت
پزشکی و دندانپزشکی
پزشکی و دندانپزشکی (عمومی)
پیش نمایش صفحه اول مقاله
![عکس صفحه اول مقاله: Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making-A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5] Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making-A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]](/preview/png/7389173.png)
چکیده انگلیسی
The fifth section of our Special Task Force report identifies and discusses two aggregation issues: 1) aggregation of cost and benefit information across individuals to a population level for benefit plan decision making and 2) combining multiple elements of value into a single value metric for individuals. First, we argue that additional elements could be included in measures of value, but such elements have not generally been included in measures of quality-adjusted life-years. For example, we describe a recently developed extended cost-effectiveness analysis (ECEA) that provides a good example of how to use a broader concept of utility. ECEA adds two features-measures of financial risk protection and income distributional consequences. We then discuss a further option for expanding this approach-augmented CEA, which can introduce many value measures. Neither of these approaches, however, provide a comprehensive measure of value. To resolve this issue, we review a technique called multicriteria decision analysis that can provide a comprehensive measure of value. We then discuss budget-setting and prioritization using multicriteria decision analysis, issues not yet fully resolved. Next, we discuss deliberative processes, which represent another important approach for population- or plan-level decisions used by many health technology assessment bodies. These use quantitative information on CEA and other elements, but the group decisions are reached by a deliberative voting process. Finally, we briefly discuss the use of stated preference methods for developing “hedonic” value frameworks, and conclude with some recommendations in this area.
ناشر
Database: Elsevier - ScienceDirect (ساینس دایرکت)
Journal: Value in Health - Volume 21, Issue 2, February 2018, Pages 146-154
Journal: Value in Health - Volume 21, Issue 2, February 2018, Pages 146-154
نویسندگان
Charles E. PhD, MBA, Darius N. PhD, Anirban PhD, Michael F. MCom, DPhil, Adrian MPhil, MA, Patricia M. PhD,