For example, data exist which show that statements on cost effectiveness of diagnostic or therapeutic procedures are more frequently favourable if the investigations are sponsored by the industry [ 5].
Although this study found clear evidence of a positive impact of both campaigns, the significant uncertainty associated with many of the model inputs used makes a definitive statement of cost-effectiveness challenging.
Findings will be summarised as pattern 1, 2 or 3 findings as presented by Glick et al. 43 Pattern 1 and 2 findings will result in a range of values for which a statement of cost-effectiveness can be made about the intervention with 95% certainty.
This mythos of cost effectiveness has been debunked by a recent Yale economic study.
These should include assessment of cost effectiveness.
§See the cost effectiveness plane in figure 2[F2] for the distribution of cost effectiveness estimates.
Cost effectiveness acceptability curves for varying threshold values of cost effectiveness will also be presented.
The results of cost effectiveness analysis are presented as incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs).
Indeed, sources such as the Consensus Statement on the Role of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Health and Medicine recommend the use of cost-effectiveness analyses to assist decision-makers and the incorporation of economic data into treatment guidelines [ 16].
An element that distinguishes NICE from most other agencies is the explicit statement of a cost-effectiveness threshold, in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained (£20,000 30,000), to classify interventions as good value for money.
Others claimed familiarity, but when pressed for examples on their understanding of cost-effectiveness analyses, they made statements often mistaking the latter for cost-consciousness or total cost savings.
