Cargando…
Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold
The Journal recently incorrectly ascribed cost-effectiveness thresholds to New Zealand, alongside other countries. New Zealand has no such thresholds when deciding the funding of pharmaceuticals. As we fund pharmaceuticals within a fixed budget, and cost-effectiveness is only one of nine decision cr...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI)
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2872338/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20617061 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph7041831 |
_version_ | 1782181217959936000 |
---|---|
author | Metcalfe, Scott Grocott, Rachel |
author_facet | Metcalfe, Scott Grocott, Rachel |
author_sort | Metcalfe, Scott |
collection | PubMed |
description | The Journal recently incorrectly ascribed cost-effectiveness thresholds to New Zealand, alongside other countries. New Zealand has no such thresholds when deciding the funding of pharmaceuticals. As we fund pharmaceuticals within a fixed budget, and cost-effectiveness is only one of nine decision criteria used to inform decisions, thresholds cannot be inferred or calculated. Thresholds inadequately account for opportunity cost and affordability, and are incompatible with budgets and maximising health gains. In New Zealand, pharmaceutical investments can only be considered ‘cost-effective’ when prioritised against other proposals at the time, and threshold levels must inevitably vary with available funds and the other criteria. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2872338 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI) |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-28723382010-07-08 Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold Metcalfe, Scott Grocott, Rachel Int J Environ Res Public Health Commentary The Journal recently incorrectly ascribed cost-effectiveness thresholds to New Zealand, alongside other countries. New Zealand has no such thresholds when deciding the funding of pharmaceuticals. As we fund pharmaceuticals within a fixed budget, and cost-effectiveness is only one of nine decision criteria used to inform decisions, thresholds cannot be inferred or calculated. Thresholds inadequately account for opportunity cost and affordability, and are incompatible with budgets and maximising health gains. In New Zealand, pharmaceutical investments can only be considered ‘cost-effective’ when prioritised against other proposals at the time, and threshold levels must inevitably vary with available funds and the other criteria. Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI) 2010-04-20 2010-04 /pmc/articles/PMC2872338/ /pubmed/20617061 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph7041831 Text en © 2010 by the authors; licensee Molecular Diversity Preservation International, Basel, Switzerland. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/). |
spellingShingle | Commentary Metcalfe, Scott Grocott, Rachel Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold |
title | Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold |
title_full | Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold |
title_fullStr | Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold |
title_full_unstemmed | Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold |
title_short | Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold |
title_sort | comments on “simoens, s. health economic assessment: a methodological primer. int. j. environ. res. public health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—new zealand in fact has no cost-effectiveness threshold |
topic | Commentary |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2872338/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20617061 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph7041831 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT metcalfescott commentsonsimoensshealtheconomicassessmentamethodologicalprimerintjenvironrespublichealth2009629502966newzealandinfacthasnocosteffectivenessthreshold AT grocottrachel commentsonsimoensshealtheconomicassessmentamethodologicalprimerintjenvironrespublichealth2009629502966newzealandinfacthasnocosteffectivenessthreshold |