Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making - A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]

TY - JOUR

T1 - Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making - A Health Economics Approach

T2 - An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]

AU - Phelps, C.

AU - Lakdawalla, D.

AU - Basu, A.

AU - Drummond, M.F.

AU - Towse, A.

AU - Danzon, P.

N1 - © 2018, International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy.

PY - 2018/2/23

Y1 - 2018/2/23

N2 - The fifth section of our Special Task Force report identifies and discusses two aggregation issues: 1) aggregation of cost and benefit information across individuals to a population level for benefit plan decision making and 2) combining multiple elements of value into a single value metric for individuals. First, we argue that additional elements could be included in measures of value, but such elements have not generally been included in measures of quality-adjusted lifeyears. For example, we describe a recently developed extended costeffectiveness analysis (ECEA) that provides a good example of how to use a broader concept of utility. ECEA adds two features—measures of financial risk protection and income distributional consequences. We then discuss a further option for expanding this approach—augmented CEA, which can introduce many value measures. Neither of these approaches, however, provide a comprehensive measure of value. To resolve this issue, we review a technique called multicriteria decision analysis that can provide a comprehensive measure of value. We then discuss budget-setting and prioritization using multicriteria decision analysis, issues not yet fully resolved. Next, we discuss deliberative processes, which represent another important approach for population- or plan-level decisions used by many health technology assessment bodies. These use quantitative information on CEA and other elements, but the group decisions are reached by a deliberative voting process. Finally, we briefly discuss the use of stated preference methods for developing “hedonic” value frameworks, and conclude with some recommendations in this area.

AB - The fifth section of our Special Task Force report identifies and discusses two aggregation issues: 1) aggregation of cost and benefit information across individuals to a population level for benefit plan decision making and 2) combining multiple elements of value into a single value metric for individuals. First, we argue that additional elements could be included in measures of value, but such elements have not generally been included in measures of quality-adjusted lifeyears. For example, we describe a recently developed extended costeffectiveness analysis (ECEA) that provides a good example of how to use a broader concept of utility. ECEA adds two features—measures of financial risk protection and income distributional consequences. We then discuss a further option for expanding this approach—augmented CEA, which can introduce many value measures. Neither of these approaches, however, provide a comprehensive measure of value. To resolve this issue, we review a technique called multicriteria decision analysis that can provide a comprehensive measure of value. We then discuss budget-setting and prioritization using multicriteria decision analysis, issues not yet fully resolved. Next, we discuss deliberative processes, which represent another important approach for population- or plan-level decisions used by many health technology assessment bodies. These use quantitative information on CEA and other elements, but the group decisions are reached by a deliberative voting process. Finally, we briefly discuss the use of stated preference methods for developing “hedonic” value frameworks, and conclude with some recommendations in this area.

KW - aggregation

KW - cost-effectiveness

KW - equity

KW - multi-dimensioned benefits

U2 - 10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.010

DO - 10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.010

M3 - Article

SN - 1098-3015

VL - 21

SP - 146

EP - 154

JO - Value in Health

JF - Value in Health

IS - 2

ER -