Good Technologies Gone Bad

Charles E. Phelps

Medical Decision Making, 1997, vol. 17, issue 1, 107-117

Abstract: Cost-effectiveness (CE) ratios vary considerably, not only across interventions, but within single interventions. Using a simple decision-tree model of the treat-vs no-treat decision to organize the analysis, four potential errors leading to these within-treatment differences in CE ratios are identified. These errors arise from estimates relating to 1) prior probabilities of disease; 2) treatment efficacies; 3) costs of treatment; and 4) patient preferences. Systematic biases, where present, suggest overuse of medical interventions. For diagnostic tests, two additional potential sources of error are con sidered (using a simple decision tree incorporating both test and treat decisions). These involve 5) sensitivity and specificity of the diagnostic test and 6) inappropriate choice of "cutoff" to determine abnormal patients, in part arising from errors in esti mating prior probability of disease. Key words: cost-effectiveness; biases; errors; re source use; utilities. (Med Decis Making 1997;17:107-117)

Date: 1997
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X9701700113 (text/html)

Related works:
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:sae:medema:v:17:y:1997:i:1:p:107-117

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9701700113

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().