Cited by 853Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifePharmaceutical Economics and PolicyGlobal Health Care Issues

Thresholds for the cost–effectiveness of interventions: alternative approaches

Open access
Marseille, Elliot, Larson, Bruce, Kazi, Dhruv S, Kahn, James G, Rosen, Sydney·2015·Bulletin of the World Health Organization

Abstract

Many countries use the cost-effectiveness thresholds recommended by the World Health Organization's Choosing Interventions that are Cost-Effective project (WHO-CHOICE) when evaluating health interventions. This project sets the threshold for cost-effectiveness as the cost of the intervention per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted less than three times the country's annual gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. Highly cost-effective interventions are defined as meeting a threshold per DALY averted of once the annual GDP per capita. We argue that reliance on these thresholds reduces the value of cost-effectiveness analyses and makes such analyses too blunt to be useful for most decision-making in the field of public health. Use of these thresholds has little theoretical justification, skirts the difficult but necessary ranking of the relative values of locally-applicable interventions and omits any consideration of what is truly affordable. The WHO-CHOICE thresholds set such a low bar for cost-effectiveness that very few interventions with evidence of efficacy can be ruled out. The thresholds have little value in assessing the trade-offs that decision-makers must confront. We present alternative approaches for applying cost-effectiveness criteria to choices in the allocation of health-care resources.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2471/blt.14.138206

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In a separate health economics analysis, single-dose HPV vaccination with catch-up in girls aged 11-20 years was found to be cost-effective under the WHO recommended threshold of one-times GDP per capita.

    “In a separate health economics analysis (unpublished), we found that single-dose HPV vaccination with catch-up vaccination in girls aged 11–20 years could be cost-effective under the WHO recommended cost-effectiveness threshold of one-times gross domestic product per capita.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marseille, E., Larson, B., Kazi, D. S., Kahn, J. G., & Rosen, S.
Affiliations
  • Health Strategies International, 555 Fifty-ninth Street, Oakland, California, 94609, United States of America (USA).
  • Boston University (US)
  • San Francisco General Hospital (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Marseille, Elliot
Venue
Bulletin of the World Health Organization
Publisher
WHO Press
Published
2014-12-15
Volume
93
Issue
2
Pages
118-124
ISSN
0042-9686 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2133104890
Cited by
851
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 68 · 2024: 58 · 2023: 69 · 2022: 93 · 2021: 101 · 2020: 100 · 2019: 105 · 2018: 76 · 2017: 78 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 18
FWCI
112.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Bulletin of the World Health Organization (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P30MH062246)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA015612)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Global Health Care Issues
Keywords
cost-effectiveness threshold, WHO-CHOICE, disability-adjusted life years, GDP per capita, healthcare resource allocation, public health decision-making, affordability, cost-effectiveness analysis
MeSH terms
Cost-Benefit Analysis, Developing Countries, Female, Health Priorities, Humans, Pregnancy, Syphilis, Global Health, World Health Organization, HIV Infections, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Benchmarking, Anti-Retroviral Agents, Insecticide-Treated Bednets, Gross Domestic Product

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