Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 3rd ed

By G. Adamiak. 2006

3,118 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f5aba7f6f45b89493a472740fb05ebccf2102465

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 Explanation and Elaboration: A Report of the ISPOR CHEERS II Good Practices Task Force. (2022, methodology): “This includes the geographical location (country or countries) and the particular setting of healthcare (ie, primary, secondary, tertiary care, or community/public health interventions)andanyother relevant sectors, suchaspayment schemes (health maintenances organization, national health insurance, o”
Handling Uncertainty in Cost-Effectiveness Models (2000, background): “3 These costs are often referred to as indirect costs; however, this term is avoided in this article since Drummond and colleagues[24] have argued that this terminology can cause confusion through the use of the same term in accountancy to mean overhead costs.”
Country-Level Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds: Initial Estimates and the Need for Further Research (2016, background): “[1] Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, et al.”
Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement (2013, unknown): “Loder Clinical Epidemiology Editor, BMJ, London, UK Forms of economic evaluation [1]”
2015 Updated Method Guideline for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Back and Neck Group (2015, background): “Full economic evaluation is the systematic comparison of (at least) 2 interventions in terms of both costs and consequences (outcomes, effects).(62) The most common types of full economic evaluation are costeffectiveness, cost-utility, and cost-benefit studies.”