Economic evaluations are analytic techniques to assess the relative costs and consequences of health care programmes and technologies. Their role is to provide rigorous data to inform the health care decision-making process. Economic evaluation may oversimplify complex health care decisions. These analyses often ignore important health consequences, contextual elements, relationships or other relevant modifying factors, which might not be appropriate in a multi-objective, multi-stakeholder issue. One solution would be to develop a new paradigm based on the issues of perspective and context. Complexity theory may provide a useful conceptual framework for economic evaluation in health care. Complexity thinking develops an awareness of issues including uncertainty, contextual issues, multiple perspectives, broader societal involvement, and transdisciplinarity. This points the economic evaluation field towards an accountability and epistemology based on pluralism and uncertainty, requiring new forms of lay-expert engagement and roles of lay knowledge into decision-making processes. This highlights the issue of reflexivity in economic evaluation in health care. A reflexive approach would allow economic evaluators to analyze how objective structures and subjective elements influence their practices. In return, this would point increase the integrity and reliability of economic evaluations. Reflexivity provides opportunities for critically thinking about the organization and activities of the intellectual field, and perhaps the potential of moving in new, creative directions. This paper argues for economic evaluators to have a less positivist attitude towards what is useful knowledge, and to use more imagination about the data and methodologies they use. r

No abstract

Background: A considerable amount of resource allocation decisions take place daily at the point of the clinical encounter; especially in primary care, where 80 percent of health problems are managed. Ignoring economic evaluation evidence in individual clinical decision-making may have a broad impact on the efficiency of health services. To date, almost all studies on the use of economic evaluation in decisionmaking used a quantitative approach, and few investigated decision-making at the clinical level. An important question is whether economic evaluations affect clinical practice. The project is an intervention research study designed to understand the role of economic evaluation in the decision-making process of family physicians (FPs). The contributions of the project will be from the perspective of Pierre Bourdieu's sociological theory.

No abstract

Background: Health Technology Assessment methods have become an important health policy tool. Yet recommendations for what constitutes appropriate and reliable evidence for assessment of medical devices are still debated because methods to evaluate pharmaceuticals are often, and incorrectly, the starting point for assessments. Objectives: The study aims to: (i) propose recommendations on appropriate methodologies to assess the evidence on medical devices (ii) identify assessment methods that can be used to measure device value and (iii) suggest key areas for future work Methods: ISPOR's Medical Devices and Diagnostics Special Interest Group conducted a comprehensive search of databases and gray literature on evidence development and value assessment on medical devices. The literature search was supplemented with hand searching from high impact journals in the related field. The 10-person expert working group obtained written comments through multiple rounds of review from internal and external stakeholders. Recommendations were made to guide future research. Results: Multi-criteria decision analysis was identified as a useful approach to assess the value of treatment. Consideration should be given to resource use measures; valid and reliable functional status questionnaires; and general and disease-specific, health-related, quality-of-life measures in economic evaluations of device use. For future work, best practices for value framework design. Conclusions: Integration of value-based evidence in an evidence-generation and -synthesis process is needed to support market access and adoption. Methodological recommendations for measuring value can be challenging when the selection of domains and assessment of value are not device-specific.