Applying economic evaluation to public health interventions: The case of interventions to promote physical activity

Journal of Public Health (United Kingdom)

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 32-39

  Trueman, Paul ^a   Anokye, Nana Kwame ^a  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

cost consequence analysis; cost utility analysis; economic evaluation; physical activity; public health intervention

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; EXERCISE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMAN; PHYSIOLOGY; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

COHORT STUDIES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; EXERCISE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH PROMOTION; HEALTHY PEOPLE PROGRAMS; HUMANS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84874773966     PISSN: 17413842     EISSN: 17413850     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fds050     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. NICE. Methods for the development of NICE public health guidance, 2nd edn. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE), 2009.
2. Drummond M, Weatherly H, Claxton K et al. Assessing the challenges of applying standard methods of economic evaluation to public health interventions. York: University of York, 2007.
3. Kelly M, McDaid D, Ludbrook A et al. Economic appraisal of public health interventions. London: London Health Development Agency, National Health System, 2005.
4. Cookson R, Drummond M, Weatherly H. Explicit incorporation of equity considerations into economic evaluation of public health interventions. Health Econ Policy Law 2009;4(Pt 2):231-45.
5. Wailoo A, Tsuchiya A, McCabe C. Weighting must wait: incorporating equity concerns into cost-effectiveness analysis may take longer than expected. Pharmacoeconomics 2009;27(12):983-9.
6. NICE. Modelling the cost effectiveness of physical activity interventions. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE), 2006.
7. NICE. Rapid review of the economic evidence of physical activity interventions. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE), 2006.
8. Pavey T, Anokye N, Taylor A et al. The effectiveness and costeffectiveness of exercise referral schemes: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2011;15(44):1-254.
9. O'Donovan G, Blazevich AJ, Boreham C et al. The ABC of physical activity for health: a consensus statement from the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences. J Sports Sci 2010;28(6): 573-91.
10. Isaacs AJ, Critchley JA, Tai SS et al. Exercise Evaluation Randomised Trial(EXERT): a randomised trial comparing GP referral for leisure centre-based exercise, community-based walking and advice only. Health Technol Assess 2007;11(10):1-184.
11. Beale S, Bending M, Trueman P. An Economic Analysis of Environmental Interventions That Promote Physical Activity. York: University of York, York Health Economics Consortium, 2007.
12. HSE. Joint Health Surveys Unit of Social and Community Planning Research and University College London. Health Survey for England 2006, 2008; SN: 5809.
13. Shaper AG, Wannamethee G, Walker M. Physical activity, hypertension and risk of heart attack in men without evidence of ischemic heart disease. J Hum Hypertens 1994;8(1):3-10. (Pubitemid 24052180)
14. Herman B, Schmitz PIM, Leyten ACM et al. Multivariate logistic analysis of risk factors for stroke in Tilburg, The Netherlands. Am J Epidemiol 1983;118:514-25. (Pubitemid 13009995)
15. NICE. Workplace health promotion: how to encourage employees to be physically active. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE), 2008.
16. Munro J, Brazier J, Davey R et al. Physical activity for the over-65s: could it be a cost-effective exercise for the NHS? J Public Health Med 1997;19(4):397-402. (Pubitemid 28031267)
17. Wanless D. Securing good health for the whole population. HM Treasury; Crown No: 0947819983.2004.
18. Kind P, Dolan P, Gudex C et al. Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ 1998;316(7133):736-41. (Pubitemid 28121072)
19. Office for National Statistics (ONS). United Kingdom interim life tables (May 2010, date last accessed).
20. Department of Health. Burdens of disease a discussion document. London: Department of Health, 1996.
21. Currie CJ, Kraus D, Morgan CL et al. NHS acute sector expenditure for diabetes: the present, future, and excess in-patient cost of care. Diabet Med 1997;14:686-92. (Pubitemid 27346859)