Comments on "simoens, s. health economic assessment: A methodological primer. int. j. environ. res. public health 2009, 6, 2950-2966"-New Zealand in fact has no cost-effectiveness threshold

11Citations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The Journal recently incorrectly ascribed cost-effectiveness thresholds to New Zealand, alongside other countries. New Zealand has no such thresholds when deciding the funding of pharmaceuticals. As we fund pharmaceuticals within a fixed budget, and cost-effectiveness is only one of nine decision criteria used to inform decisions, thresholds cannot be inferred or calculated. Thresholds inadequately account for opportunity cost and affordability, and are incompatible with budgets and maximising health gains. In New Zealand, pharmaceutical investments can only be considered 'cost-effective' when prioritised against other proposals at the time, and threshold levels must inevitably vary with available funds and the other criteria. © 2010 by the authors.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Metcalfe, S., & Grocott, R. (2010). Comments on “simoens, s. health economic assessment: A methodological primer. int. j. environ. res. public health 2009, 6, 2950-2966”-New Zealand in fact has no cost-effectiveness threshold. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. MDPI. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph7041831

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free