Cited by 118Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeDelphi Technique in ResearchEvaluation and Performance Assessment

Do Health-Care Decision Makers Find Economic Evaluations Useful? The Findings of Focus Group Research in UK Health Authorities

Open access
Hoffmann, Christiane, Stoykova, Boyka A., Nixon, John, Glanville, Julie M., Misso, Kate, Drummond, Michael F.·2002·Value in Health

Abstract

Objectives The impact of economic evaluation studies on health-care decision makers has been shown to be rather limited. However, there is an increasing requirement for the cost-effectiveness of health-care interventions to be considered in formulating and implementing guidelines for clinical practice. This paper reports the findings of recent focus group research among UK health authorities, which examined the usefulness of published economic evaluations within the decision-making processes. The findings are presented and discussed in light of other studies that have addressed this issue.Methods Focus group research was conducted with decision makers from a sample of two UK health authorities using the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) as a research vehicle to locate and report the findings of relevant economic studies. The study sample was initially invited to respond to questionnaires exploring the usefulness of published economic evaluations in the decision-making process and to outline particular topics that it felt would benefit from similar economic evidence. Following this, a detailed search was undertaken to retrieve structured NHS EED abstracts on these topics such that the usefulness and limitations of economic evaluations to decision making could be determined.Results Decision makers generally recognized the usefulness and necessity of published economic evaluations in informing their decision-making processes. However, the value of studies was often limited because of the poor generalizability of results, the narrowness of research questions, and the lack of methodological rigor common to many published studies. A total of 237 NHS EED full abstracts were retrieved in the specified areas of interest, which, within specified caveats, were generally found to be useful as decision-making tools. There was a general consensus among decision makers in favor of developing a quality-scoring system for studies, thereby going beyond the critical summaries given in NHS EED.Conclusions Decision makers value information on cost-effectiveness as well as effectiveness alone, but methodological improvements are necessary to increase the reliability of economic studies. A quality-scoring system for published studies would be a useful development as a filtering mechanism for decision makers but would raise a number of challenges for health economists.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1524-4733.2002.52109.x

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hoffmann, C., Stoykova, B. A., Nixon, J., Glanville, J. M., Misso, K., & Drummond, M. F.
Affiliations
University of York (GB)
Venue
Value in Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-03
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
71-78
ISSN
1098-3015 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4323238629
Cited by
118
References
13
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 4
FWCI
17.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Value in Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Keywords
economic evaluation, healthcare decision-making, cost-effectiveness, health authorities, methodological quality, generalizability of study results
MeSH terms
Attitude of Health Personnel, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Decision Making, Organizational, Health Policy, Health Priorities, Health Services Research, Humans, State Medicine, Focus Groups

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review