Mark versus Luke? Appropriate methods for the evaluation of public health interventions

K. Claxton; M. Sculpher; A. Culyer

Mark versus Luke? Appropriate methods for the evaluation of public health interventions

Research output: Working paper

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that a social decision making approach to evaluation can be generalised to interventions such as public health and national policies which have multiple objectives and impact on multiple constraints within and beyond the health sector. We demonstrate that a mathematical programming solution to this problem is possible, but the information requirements make it impractical. Instead we propose a simple compensation test for interventions with multiple and cross-sectoral effects. However, rather than compensation based on individual preferences, it can be based on the net benefits falling on different sectors. The valuation of outcomes
is based on the shadow prices of the existing budget constraints, which are implicit in existing public expenditure and its allocation across different sectors. A ‘welfarist’ societal perspective is not sufficient; rather, a multiple perspective evaluation which accounts for costs and effects falling on each sector is required.

Original language	English
Place of Publication	York, UK
Publisher	Centre for Health Economics, University of York
Number of pages	22
Publication status	Published - 2007

Publication series

Name	CHE Research Paper
Publisher	Centre for Health Economics, University of York
No.	31

Keywords

cost-effectiveness analysis
decision rules
public health

Access to Document

CHERP31Final published version, 171 KB

https://www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/papers/researchpapers/rp31_evaluation_of_public_health_interventions.pdf

Cite this

@techreport{d02702817d6b4ea296923bd784c275a1,

title = "Mark versus Luke? Appropriate methods for the evaluation of public health interventions",

abstract = "The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that a social decision making approach to evaluation can be generalised to interventions such as public health and national policies which have multiple objectives and impact on multiple constraints within and beyond the health sector. We demonstrate that a mathematical programming solution to this problem is possible, but the information requirements make it impractical. Instead we propose a simple compensation test for interventions with multiple and cross-sectoral effects. However, rather than compensation based on individual preferences, it can be based on the net benefits falling on different sectors. The valuation of outcomesis based on the shadow prices of the existing budget constraints, which are implicit in existing public expenditure and its allocation across different sectors. A {\textquoteleft}welfarist{\textquoteright} societal perspective is not sufficient; rather, a multiple perspective evaluation which accounts for costs and effects falling on each sector is required. ",

keywords = "cost-effectiveness analysis, decision rules, public health",

author = "K. Claxton and M. Sculpher and A. Culyer",

year = "2007",

language = "English",

series = "CHE Research Paper",

publisher = "Centre for Health Economics, University of York",

number = "31",

type = "WorkingPaper",

institution = "Centre for Health Economics, University of York",

}

TY - UNPB

T1 - Mark versus Luke? Appropriate methods for the evaluation of public health interventions

AU - Claxton, K.

AU - Sculpher, M.

AU - Culyer, A.

PY - 2007

Y1 - 2007

N2 - The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that a social decision making approach to evaluation can be generalised to interventions such as public health and national policies which have multiple objectives and impact on multiple constraints within and beyond the health sector. We demonstrate that a mathematical programming solution to this problem is possible, but the information requirements make it impractical. Instead we propose a simple compensation test for interventions with multiple and cross-sectoral effects. However, rather than compensation based on individual preferences, it can be based on the net benefits falling on different sectors. The valuation of outcomesis based on the shadow prices of the existing budget constraints, which are implicit in existing public expenditure and its allocation across different sectors. A ‘welfarist’ societal perspective is not sufficient; rather, a multiple perspective evaluation which accounts for costs and effects falling on each sector is required.

AB - The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that a social decision making approach to evaluation can be generalised to interventions such as public health and national policies which have multiple objectives and impact on multiple constraints within and beyond the health sector. We demonstrate that a mathematical programming solution to this problem is possible, but the information requirements make it impractical. Instead we propose a simple compensation test for interventions with multiple and cross-sectoral effects. However, rather than compensation based on individual preferences, it can be based on the net benefits falling on different sectors. The valuation of outcomesis based on the shadow prices of the existing budget constraints, which are implicit in existing public expenditure and its allocation across different sectors. A ‘welfarist’ societal perspective is not sufficient; rather, a multiple perspective evaluation which accounts for costs and effects falling on each sector is required.

KW - cost-effectiveness analysis

KW - decision rules

KW - public health

M3 - Working paper

T3 - CHE Research Paper

BT - Mark versus Luke? Appropriate methods for the evaluation of public health interventions

PB - Centre for Health Economics, University of York

CY - York, UK

ER -