The phrase "more cost saving" is grammatically correct and can be used in written English.
It is typically used to compare two things in terms of their cost-saving benefits. For example: "The company's new energy-efficient equipment is more cost saving compared to their old machines." In this sentence, "more cost saving" is used to show that the new equipment is better at saving costs than the old machines. Another example: "Switching to a paperless system is a more cost-saving solution in the long run." Here, "more cost-saving" is used to emphasize the long-term cost-saving benefits of switching to a paperless system.
Lastly, switching more people to a cheaper, equally effective drug is more cost saving.
When the rebate of 9% (entry rebated) or 14% (cumulative rebate based on the entry one and additional 5% based on sales) was incorporated into the calculation of daily drug cost, rivaroxaban was found to be much more cost saving alternative relative to VKA (-€468 and -€650 for 9% and 14% respectively).
In this sense it would be convenient to carry out a cost-effectiveness study to assess which alternative is more cost saving : to keep on with the current procedure of sending the samples when cases are reported or sending them in a more aggregated manner that would decrease transportation and processing costs.
The candidate gene approach is thus more convenient and cost saving.
We see that the smaller the ratio, the more is the cost saving.
Should the BP-point reduction be sustained beyond the observed 6 months examined here, the expected reduction in cardiovascular events 31 may mean that the intervention is dominant over usual care in the long term that is to say, both more effective and cost saving.
Although organizations can purchase services through outside contracted vendors, those developing skills in their own personnel can use resources more cost effectively, saving as much as 25 40%, particularly in areas such as disaster management.
In almost all cases explored in the OWSA, Straticyte™ and histopathology was cost saving (more effective and cheaper) compared to histopathology alone.
When a therapy is cost saving and more effective, it is termed 'dominant' because it is clearly preferred.
Conclusions Human papillomavirus test of cure would be more effective and would be cost saving compared with cytology only follow-up.
The results are summarized in Table 3 and 4. The 80% reimbursement strategy is dominant (i.e. cost saving and more effective than the current situation) in both situations of 55% and 68.7% recourse to malaria chemoprophylaxis.
