Methods for public health economic evaluation: A Delphi survey of decision makers in English and Welsh local government

Abstract

Standard reference case methods recommended for health technology appraisals do not translate well to a public health setting. This paper reports on a Delphi survey designed to elicit views of public health decision makers in England and Wales, about different methodological elements of economic evaluation. This is important as methods should align with the objective function of decision makers. The Delphi survey comprised two rounds, with round 1 allowing open‐ended recommendations in addition to 5‐point Likert scale responses. The final survey comprised 36 questions, and levels and strength of agreement were assessed using median values and mean absolute deviation of the median. The Delphi panel (n = 66) achieved high levels of agreement for costs, health, well‐being, and productivity impact to be important elements within an economic evaluation. The panel agreed that evaluations should be relevant to the local context and include costs and consequences over a lifetime horizon. There was a call for the transparent reporting of costs and effects for different population subgroups, and for different sectors. Overall, the panel revealed a preference for a flexible approach, understanding that economic evidence fits within a dynamic process of decision making. These results provide empirical evidence to inform guidelines for public health economic evaluation.

Cost-effectiveness evidence of mental health prevention and promotion interventions: A systematic review of economic evaluations

“…Furthermore, preventive interventions or public health interventions require financial support and implementation from sectors outside of health (e.g., school-based interventions typically involve the education sector) [ 87 ]. Standard economic evaluation methods commonly applied to health technology assessment may not be transferable to health promotion evaluation and broader frameworks, such as cost-benefit analyses may be required where broader benefits can be captured and measured [ 88 ]. Given the rapid growth of the number of interventions for promoting mental or psychological well-being, and building resilience [ 89 ], economic evaluations with improved methods and capturing intersectoral cost and outcomes of such interventions are needed [ 86 ].…”

Cost comparison of five Australasian obesity prevention interventions for children aged from birth to two years

“…Costs were considered important by local decision‐makers when making (dis)investment decisions in a recent study conducted in the United Kingdom and Ireland 46 , along with health‐related and well‐being outcomes. Evidence suggests that information on economic considerations such as intervention resource use and costs are perceived to increase the potential for interventions to be implemented on a more widespread basis 47 .…”

Modelling tool to support decision-making in the NHS Health Check programme: workshops, systematic review and co-production with users

“…The views of our stakeholders chimed with the findings of other researchers around the preferences of public health decision-makers on economic evaluation. 196 This research found that public health decisionmakers preferred economic evaluations to include costs and effects for different subgroups and different sectors (e.g. health, social care, productivity), as we have included in the workHORSE model.…”