Caveat emptor NICE: biased use of cost-effectiveness is inefficient and inequitable

Jack Dowie; Mette Kjer Kaltoft; Jesper Bo Nielsen; Glenn Salkeld

doi:https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7191.1

doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7191.1

Caveat emptor NICE: biased use of cost-effectiveness is inefficient and inequitable

,

,

..., Glenn Salkeld

38

F1000Research

Volume: 4, Pages: 1078 - 1078

Published: Oct 16, 2015

Abstract

Concern with the threshold applied in cost-effectiveness analyses by bodies such as NICE distracts attention from their biased use of the principle. The bias results from the prior requirement that an intervention be effective (usually 'clinically effective') before its cost-effectiveness is considered. The underlying justification for the use of cost-effectiveness as a criterion, whatever the threshold adopted, is that decisions in a...

Paper Fields

Paper Details

Title

Caveat emptor NICE: biased use of cost-effectiveness is inefficient and inequitable

DOI

doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7191.1

Published Date

Oct 16, 2015

Journal

F1000Research

Volume

4

Pages

1078 - 1078

Citation AnalysisPro

You’ll need to upgrade your plan to Pro

Looking to understand the true influence of a researcher’s work across journals & affiliations?

Scinapse’s Top 10 Citation Journals & Affiliations graph reveals the quality and authenticity of citations received by a paper.
Discover whether citations have been inflated due to self-citations, or if citations include institutional bias.

Learn more

Notes

History