Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Separate spheres and indirect benefits.

Dan W Brock1

  • 1Department of Clinical Bioethics, Warren G, Maguson Clinical Centre, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-1156, USA. Dbrock@mail.cc.nih.gov

Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation : C/E
|May 30, 2003
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Recommendations for Conduct, Methodological Practices, and Reporting of Cost-effectiveness Analyses: Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine.

JAMA·2016
Same author

Good medical ethics.

Journal of medical ethics·2014
Same author

Making treatment decisions for oneself: weighing the value.

The Hastings Center report·2014
Same author

Reflections on the patient preference predictor proposal.

The Journal of medicine and philosophy·2014
Same author

Deactivation of pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

Progress in cardiovascular diseases·2012
Same author

Prioritizing registered donors in organ allocation: an ethical appraisal of the Israeli organ transplant law.

Current opinion in critical care·2012

Prioritizing health resources requires measuring benefits and costs. This study examines whether to include non-health benefits and indirect costs in health intervention assessments.

Area of Science:

  • Health Economics
  • Public Health Policy
  • Bioethics

Background:

  • Healthcare resource prioritization relies on evaluating benefits and costs of interventions.
  • Different ethical frameworks exist, including consequentialist and non-consequentialist approaches.
  • Accurate measurement of benefits and costs is crucial for justified prioritization.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To address two key issues in assessing benefits and costs for health resource prioritization.
  • To explore the 'Separate Spheres problem': whether to include non-health benefits (e.g., economic) alongside health benefits.
  • To examine the 'Indirect Benefits problem': whether to include indirect costs and benefits in addition to direct ones.

Main Methods:

  • Conceptual analysis of benefit and cost assessment in health interventions.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Discussion of the implications of including non-health and indirect factors.
  • Focus on the impact on cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) rankings.

    • Main Results:

    • The inclusion of non-health benefits and indirect costs can significantly alter the ranking of health interventions.
    • Decisions on what constitutes relevant benefits and costs impact prioritization outcomes.
    • The scope of measurement directly influences the results of economic evaluations.

    Conclusions:

    • Defining the boundaries of benefits and costs is critical for health resource prioritization.
    • The 'Separate Spheres' and 'Indirect Benefits' problems have substantial implications for policy and practice.
    • Further consideration of these issues is needed for robust cost-effectiveness analysis.