Linked Life Data

10178663

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/10178663

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
4
pubmed:dateCreated
1998-5-28
pubmed:abstractText
There has been much recent debate in the health economics literature as to the (near) equivalence of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that whether such a (near) equivalence exists depends on whether one defines economic evaluations as 'CBA' or 'CEA' on the basis of either what is measured or what question the analyst is seeking to answer. The former basis of definition is popular within the 'decision science' approach to economic evaluation, but does not seem to have any theoretical support. If the latter, more theoretically correct, basis is accepted, there is no longer a case for the (near) equivalence of CBA and CEA.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
T
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Apr
pubmed:issn
1170-7690
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
13
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
389-96
pubmed:dateRevised
2005-11-16
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1998
pubmed:articleTitle
The (near) equivalence of cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses. Fact or fallacy?
pubmed:affiliation
Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Scotland. c.donaldson@abdn.ac.uk
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Review