Cargando…

Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making—A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]()

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 indi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Phelps, Charles E., Lakdawalla, Darius N., Basu, Anirban, Drummond, Michael F., Towse, Adrian, Danzon, Patricia M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7110784/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29477392
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.010
_version_ 1783513134809481216
author Phelps, Charles E.
Lakdawalla, Darius N.
Basu, Anirban
Drummond, Michael F.
Towse, Adrian
Danzon, Patricia M.
author_facet Phelps, Charles E.
Lakdawalla, Darius N.
Basu, Anirban
Drummond, Michael F.
Towse, Adrian
Danzon, Patricia M.
author_sort Phelps, Charles E.
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7110784
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71107842020-04-02 Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making—A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]() Phelps, Charles E. Lakdawalla, Darius N. Basu, Anirban Drummond, Michael F. Towse, Adrian Danzon, Patricia M. Value Health Article 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. International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. 2018-02 2018-02-21 /pmc/articles/PMC7110784/ /pubmed/29477392 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.010 Text en © 2017 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Article
Phelps, Charles E.
Lakdawalla, Darius N.
Basu, Anirban
Drummond, Michael F.
Towse, Adrian
Danzon, Patricia M.
Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making—A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]()
title Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making—A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]()
title_full Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making—A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]()
title_fullStr Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making—A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]()
title_full_unstemmed Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making—A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]()
title_short Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making—A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]()
title_sort approaches to aggregation and decision making—a health economics approach: an ispor special task force report [5]()
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7110784/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29477392
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.010
work_keys_str_mv AT phelpscharlese approachestoaggregationanddecisionmakingahealtheconomicsapproachanisporspecialtaskforcereport5
AT lakdawalladariusn approachestoaggregationanddecisionmakingahealtheconomicsapproachanisporspecialtaskforcereport5
AT basuanirban approachestoaggregationanddecisionmakingahealtheconomicsapproachanisporspecialtaskforcereport5
AT drummondmichaelf approachestoaggregationanddecisionmakingahealtheconomicsapproachanisporspecialtaskforcereport5
AT towseadrian approachestoaggregationanddecisionmakingahealtheconomicsapproachanisporspecialtaskforcereport5
AT danzonpatriciam approachestoaggregationanddecisionmakingahealtheconomicsapproachanisporspecialtaskforcereport5