Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
3
pubmed:dateCreated
1995-7-7
pubmed:abstractText
In a recent issue of Health Policy, Birch and Gafni argued against the use of cost-effectiveness league tables in health care decision making. They argued that league tables should be returned to where they are best used and understood--the sports pages. Recently the debate about the presentation and interpretation of cost-effectiveness data has been given an additional impetus in the UK through the publication, by the Department of Health, of the Register of Cost-Effectiveness Studies (RCES). During the production of the RCES, it became apparent that there were similarities between the decision makers' thirst for economic data and the sports fans' thirst for information about their team. In this paper we review the pros and cons of using published cost-effectiveness data in decision making, compared with the local team approach suggested by Birch and Gafni. We conclude that there are advantages from using published data, providing these are produced according to standardized methods and interpreted intelligently. Most importantly, cost-effectiveness data, whether published or generated locally, are unlikely to give decision makers a technical solution to the resource allocation problem. Rather, they should be viewed as a stimulus for local discussion and debate.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
H
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Mar
pubmed:issn
0168-8510
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
31
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
231-8
pubmed:dateRevised
2001-11-26
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1995
pubmed:articleTitle
Cost-effectiveness league tables: think of the fans.
pubmed:affiliation
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, Heslington, UK.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comment