MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153816399 · doi:10.1002/jts.20190

A guide to economic evaluation: Methods for cost‐effectiveness analysis of person‐level data

2006· review· en· W2153816399 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey S. Hoch, Mark W. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Traumatic Stress · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)Economic analysisCost-effectiveness analysisEconomic evaluationHealth economicsPsychologyCost–benefit analysisCost effectivenessPublic healthClinical psychologyPublic economicsMedicineEconomicsRisk analysis (engineering)NursingPolitical scienceMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors introduce economic evaluation with particular attention to cost-effectiveness analysis. They begin by establishing why health care decisions should be guided by economics. They then explore different types of economic evaluations. To illustrate how to conduct and evaluate a cost-effectiveness analysis, a hypothetical study about the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder with psychotherapy versus pharmacotherapy is considered. The authors conclude with recommendations for increasing the strength and relevance of economic evaluations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.862
GPT teacher head0.655
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Traumatic StressSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207