Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to render cost-effectiveness studies on smoking cessation therapies, utilized until now, more comparable and more useful for medical decision making.\n\nMETHODS: The cost-effectiveness ratios reported by the studies were recalculated using a societal perspective and guidelines for economic evaluation.\n\nRESULTS: The costs of individual interventions generally increased as a result of the standardization procedure, whereas the effect size decreased. This resulted in increases in the cost-effectiveness ratios for individual studies ranging from 120% to 5600%.\n\nCONCLUSIONS: The variation between studies in the percentage increase in cost-effectiveness ratios is huge. This means that not following guidelines when calculating cost-effectiveness ratios can result in large errors. Despite the fact that the standardized cost-effectiveness ratios of smoking interventions were higher than the unstandardized cost-effectiveness ratios, interventions aimed at reducing the prevalence of smoking are cost-effective.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 437-48 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Medical Decision Making |
| Volume | 25 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2005 |
Keywords
- Cost-Benefit Analysis
- Guidelines as Topic
- Humans
- Smoking Cessation
- Smoking Cessation: economics
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Systematic review of economic evaluations of smoking cessation: Standardizing the cost-effectiveness'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver