The impact of comparative effectiveness research on health and health care spending

Anirban Basu, Anupam Jena and Tomas Philipson

Journal of Health Economics, 2011, vol. 30, issue 4, 695-706

Abstract: Comparative effectiveness research (CER) is thought to identify what works and does not work in health care. We interpret CER as infusing evidence on product quality into markets, shifting the relative demand for products in CER studies. We analyze how shifts in demand affect health and health care spending and demonstrate that CER may raise or lower overall health when treatments have heterogeneous effects, but payers respond with product-specific coverage policies. Among patients with schizophrenia, we calibrate that subsidy policies based on the clinical trial CATIE may have reduced overall health by inducing some patients to switch away from schizophrenia treatments that were effective for them towards winners of the CER.

Keywords: Cost-effectiveness; analysis; Comparative; effectiveness; analysis; Technology; assessment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2011
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (13)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629611000658
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
Working Paper: The Impact of Comparative Effectiveness Research on Health and Health Care Spending (2010)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jhecon:v:30:y:2011:i:4:p:695-706

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Health Economics is currently edited by J. P. Newhouse, A. J. Culyer, R. Frank, K. Claxton and T. McGuire

More articles in Journal of Health Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu (repec@elsevier.com).