Is it really possible to build a bridge between cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis?

Journal of Health Economics

Volumn 21, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 827-843

  Dolan, Paul ^a   Edlin, Richard ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cost benefit analysis; Cost effectiveness analysis; Economic evaluation; Quality adjusted life years; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE; METHODOLOGY; WELFARE ECONOMICS; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ARTICLE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; HEALTH CARE; METHODOLOGY; MODEL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; STANDARD; THEORY; WELFARE;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FINANCING, PERSONAL; HEALTH CARE RATIONING; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; INCOME; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; PUBLIC SECTOR; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; RISK; SOCIAL WELFARE; VALUE OF LIFE;

EID: 0036045177     PISSN: 01676296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-6296(02)00011-5     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Life-cycle preferences over consumption and health: When is cost-effectiveness analysis equivalent to cost-benefit analysis?
2. On the economic foundations of CEA: Ladies and gentlemen, take your positions please
3. The normative economics of health care finance and provision
4. Health care CBA/CEA: An update on the growth and composition of the literature
5. Income effects and the value of health
6. The relationship between cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-benefit analysis
7. The friction cost method: A comment
8. Some reflections on cost-effectiveness analysis
9. Paternalistic altruism and the value of a statistical life
10. Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics and interpersonal comparisons of utility
11. On valuing morbidity cost-effectiveness analysis, and being rude
12. Willingness-to-pay and the distribution of risk and wealth
13. Equality of what?
14. Alternative approaches to valuing intangible health losses: The evidence for multiple sclerosis