首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Elsevier Public Health Emergency Collection >Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making—A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report 5
【2h】

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

机译:聚合和决策方法—健康经济学方法:ISPOR特别工作组的报告5

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

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.
机译:我们的特别工作组报告的第五部分确定并讨论了两个汇总问题:1)将各个人的成本和收益信息汇总到整个人群,以制定收益计划决策; 2)将多个价值要素合并为一个人的单一价值指标。首先,我们认为可以将其他要素包括在价值度量中,但是这些要素通常未包含在质量调整生命年的度量中。例如,我们描述了最近开发的扩展成本效益分析(ECEA),它为如何使用更广泛的效用概念提供了一个很好的例子。 ECEA增加了两个功能-金融风险保护措施和收入分配后果。然后,我们讨论了扩展此方法的另一种选择-增强的CEA,它可以引入许多价值度量。但是,这两种方法都无法提供全面的价值衡量标准。为了解决此问题,我们回顾了一种称为多准则决策分析的技术,该技术可以提供价值的全面衡量。然后,我们将使用多准则决策分析来讨论预算制定和优先级排序问题,这些问题尚未完全解决。接下来,我们讨论审议过程,这是许多卫生技术评估机构使用的另一种重要的人口或计划级决策方法。这些使用关于CEA和其他元素的定量信息,但是小组的决定是通过协商投票过程达成的。最后,我们简要讨论了使用陈述的偏好方法开发“享乐”价值框架的情况,并在此领域提出了一些建议。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号