David D. Kim and a team of co-authors from the Center for Enhanced Value Assessment (CEVA) at Tufts Medical Center have published a paper examining perspective and costing approaches used in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) and the distribution of reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).
Titled “Perspective and Costing in Cost‑Effectiveness Analysis, 1974–2018,” the paper found that, despite the importance of the analytic perspective in cost-effectiveness analysis, study authors often mis-specified or did not clearly state the perspective used.
Additionally, the use of a health care payer or a health care sector perspective persists in most published studies and national guidelines. When a societal perspective was used, authors often did not apply it as broadly as intended. Only a few non-health consequences were considered, whereas broader non-healthcare sector impacts were seldom examined.
The paper also finds that the consistent use of the impact inventory and reporting of disaggregate outcomes can help reduce discrepancies across analyses capturing non-health consequences
Other authors included Madison C. Silver, Natalia Kunst, Joshua T. Cohen, Daniel A. Ollendorf, and Peter J. Neumann.
Readers can access the paper here, and an online supplement of additional data here.
For more information about CEVA, visit here.