Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 11, 2026

Operant Protocols for Assessing the Cost-benefit Analysis During Reinforced Decision Making by Rodents
Published on: September 10, 2018
The (near) equivalence of cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses. Fact or fallacy?
1Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Scotland. c.donaldson@abdn.ac.uk
Abstract:
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.
Related Concept Videos
Cause and Effect
The Availability Heuristic
The Representativeness Heuristic
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Bioequivalence Data: Statistical Interpretation
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II

