Cost-effectiveness

Ophthalmology

Volumn 115, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 211-212

  Radhakrishnan, Muralikrishnan ^a   Venkatesh, Rengaraj ^a   Ravindran, Ravilla D ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CATARACT EXTRACTION; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; LETTER; PHACOEMULSIFICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE;

CATARACT; CATARACT EXTRACTION; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; INDIA; LENS IMPLANTATION, INTRAOCULAR; MICROSURGERY; PHACOEMULSIFICATION; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 37349125507     PISSN: 01616420     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.06.045     Document Type: Letter

References (4)

1. Gogate P., Deshpande M., and Nirmalan P.K. Why do phacoemulsification?. Manual small-incision cataract surgery is almost as effective, but less expensive. Ophthalmology 114 (2007) 965-968
2. Muralikrishnan R., Venkatesh R., Prajna V.N., and Frick K.D. Economic cost of cataract surgery procedures in an established eye care centre in southern India. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 11 (2004) 369-380
3. Drummond M.F., Sculpher M.J., and Torrance G.W. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 3rd ed. (2005), Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom
4. Graves N., Walker D., Raine R., et al. Cost data for individual patients included in clinical studies: no amount of statistical analysis can compensate for inadequate costing methods. Health Econ 11 (2002) 735-739