Jul 1, 2003, 00:00 AM

10.1046/j.1524-4733.2003.64003.x

https://www.valueinhealthjournal.com/article/S1098-3015(10)60151-9/fulltext

Section Title :

Section Order : 12

First Page :

As a strong advocate of the formal tools of regulatory analysis, such as risk analysis, decision analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and cost–benefit analysis, I believe that these tools can help us accomplish more public health and medical protection at less cost than will occur when decisions are made without good analysis. Although formal analyses do have much insight to offer, it is fair to say that their influence on practical decision making in both the public sector and the private sector has been limited to date. The following are steps that groups like ISPOR can take to increase the influence of these analytic tools in the policy process. I am tempted to suggest, after 10 months of experience, that the real reason lies in the ratio of professional affiliations in the regulatory arms of the government, which run about five lawyers for one analyst, or at least that is what I have been sensing in my initial experience in government. But I do think that there are some deeper intellectual and institutional reasons why these types of analysis that we champion have a limited impact, and I suggest a few of those ideas for your consideration.

https://www.valueinhealthjournal.com/action/showCitFormats?pii=S1098-3015(10)60151-9&doi=10.1046/j.1524-4733.2003.64003.x

HEOR Topics :

• Academic & Educational
• Best Research Practices
• Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis
• Economic Evaluation
• Methodological & Statistical Research
• Modeling and simulation
• Organizational Practices

Tags :

Regions :

• Global