Generalized cost-effectiveness analysis for national-level priority-setting in the health sector

Area of Science:

• Public Health
• Health Economics
• Health Policy

Background:

• Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is crucial for public health decision-making but faces limited use due to technical, political, and systemic barriers.
• Generalized CEA aims to overcome these barriers, enhancing the application of economic evidence at regional and country levels.
• Existing economic evidence often has shortcomings, hindering the optimal use of cost-effectiveness information.

Purpose of the Study:

• To introduce Generalized CEA as a method to improve the use of cost-effectiveness information in public health.
• To present the WHO-CHOICE initiative, providing a new economic evidence base and methodological developments for health interventions.
• To facilitate the tailoring of cost-effectiveness data to specific country contexts for better health policy and planning.

Main Methods:

• Generalized CEA is applied to generate an economic evidence base for a range of health interventions.
• WHO-CHOICE provides estimated sub-regional costs and effects of interventions.
• Data can be tailored by adjusting intervention input costs, coverage, efficacy, and adherence rates.

Main Results:

• WHO-CHOICE offers a customizable economic evidence base for health interventions.
• The framework allows for the assessment of current intervention efficiency and prioritization of new ones.
• Results can inform policy-makers on resource allocation for maximum health impact.

Conclusions:

• Generalized CEA and WHO-CHOICE provide valuable tools for health policy and planning.
• This approach aids in assessing resource efficiency and prioritizing interventions based on cost-effectiveness.
• The findings support decision-making to improve health outcomes, reduce inequalities, and benefit the poor.