EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

The Cost-Effectiveness of Screening Programs Using Single and Multiple Birth Cohort Simulations: A Comparison Using a Model of Cervical Cancer

Sarah Dewilde and Rob Anderson
Additional contact information
Sarah Dewilde: MEDTAP International® Inc., London, UK
Rob Anderson: CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney, PO Box 123, Broadway, NSW 2007, Australialia.

Medical Decision Making, 2004, vol. 24, issue 5, 486-492

Abstract: Despite early recognition of the theoretical advantages of simulations that include different population subgroups/ strata and different birth cohorts, manymodeling-based economic evaluations of cervical screening have been based on unrealistic single birth cohort simulations. The authors examined the effect of amultiple birth cohort simulation on the incremental cost-effectiveness estimates of cervical screening programs, compared to a conventional single cohort simulation. The choice of hypothetical cohort that starts the simulation had a major impact on the cost-effectiveness estimates: Compared with a single birth cohort simulation, the incremental cost-effectiveness of a shift from biennial to triennial screening was 30% higher when using the multiple cohort simulation. Multiple cohort simulations using the different age structures of 4 countries had little impact on the costeffectiveness ratios (variation

Keywords: cost-effectiveness; Markov model; cervical screening; cohort simulations (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2004
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/10.1177/0272989X04268953 (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:24:y:2004:i:5:p:486-492

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X04268953

Access Statistics for this article

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

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:24:y:2004:i:5:p:486-492