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

Getting the cost right in cost-effectiveness analyses

N Wolff1, T W Helminiak, J K Tebes

  • 1Institute for Health, Health Care Policy, and Aging Research, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, USA. nwolff@rci.rutgers.edu

The American Journal of Psychiatry
|June 1, 1997
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

Real-time monitoring of CdTe quantum dots growth in aqueous solution.

Scientific reports·2024
Same author

Prospective multicentre observational study assessing the tolerance and perception of patients using the Liquick Base catheter with an Ergothan tip.

Progres en urologie : journal de l'Association francaise d'urologie et de la Societe francaise d'urologie·2020
Same author

Synchrotron FTIR and Raman spectroscopy provide unique spectral fingerprints for Arabidopsis floral stem vascular tissues.

Journal of experimental botany·2018
Same author

Diagnostic accuracy of the ADOS and ADOS-2 in clinical practice.

European child & adolescent psychiatry·2018
Same author

Functional NiTi grids for in situ straining in the TEM.

Ultramicroscopy·2017
Same author

Effects of multisensory integration processes on response inhibition in adolescent autism spectrum disorder.

Psychological medicine·2016
Same journal

2026 Annual Meeting: President-Elect Address.

The American journal of psychiatry·2026
Same journal

2026 Annual Meeting: CEO and Medical Director's Address.

The American journal of psychiatry·2026
Same journal

Reports to the Membership.

The American journal of psychiatry·2026
Same journal

Convergent Metabolic Dysregulations But Divergent Contributing Pathways Across Severe Mental Disorders: The Power of Combining Genetics and Metabolomics.

The American journal of psychiatry·2026
Same journal

2026 Annual Meeting: Presidential Address.

The American journal of psychiatry·2026
Same journal

Represcribing Previously Used Antipsychotics: Response to So.

The American journal of psychiatry·2026
See all related articles

Methodological choices significantly impact mental health intervention cost estimates. Failing to report these choices can lead to undetected biases in cost-effectiveness findings.

Area of Science:

  • Health Economics
  • Mental Health Services Research

Background:

  • Comparative studies of mental health interventions rely on accurate cost estimations.
  • Methodological assumptions in cost measurement can introduce significant bias.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To examine how different methods of measuring unit costs affect cost estimates.
  • To analyze the impact of methodological assumptions on the ratio of treatment costs in comparative mental health studies.

Main Methods:

  • Calculated unit costs for outpatient, individual, and group therapy under varying assumptions at a community mental health center (CMHC).
  • Utilized hypothetical service utilization profiles to compute treatment costs for two CMHC programs.

Main Results:

  • Unit costs for outpatient services varied widely, from $108 to $538 per hour.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Therapy unit costs fluctuated by 156% depending on the perspective (management vs. economist).
  • The ratio of outpatient costs between two programs ranged from 0.6 to 1.8.

    • Conclusions:

    • Methodological choices in cost analysis can introduce bias into cost-effectiveness findings.
    • Lack of reporting on crucial methodological details hinders the detection of these biases in randomized control trials.