Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Research Framework to Improve Health Disparity Evidence Gaps in Value Assessments

  • Current Opinion
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A value assessment is intended as a tool for evaluating healthcare treatments to gauge value and inform decisions. Economic value assessments typically incorporate a cost-effectiveness analysis, focusing on costs and health outcomes important to payers, missing important information to ensure existing markets optimize resource allocation. Despite frequent calls for more explicit consideration of health equity impacts in value assessments, health economists continue to develop models informed by traditional cost and quality-of-life data that do not capture differences experienced by health disparity populations. This conceptual paper proposes a research framework to enhance data collection and analysis to address these gaps and better quantify the value of a health innovation, and better assess how a new intervention impacts health disparities. The framework comprises three distinct phases that build on one another: (1) contextualization of lived experiences for disadvantaged communities; (2) individual-level quantification of health disparities for cost and quality-of-life measures; and (3) quantifying community-level impacts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tromberg BJ, Schwetz TA, Perez-Stable EJ, Hodes RJ, Woychik RP, Bright RA, et al. Rapid scaling up of Covid-19 diagnostic testing in the United States: the NIH RADx Initiative. N Engl J Med. 2020;383:1071–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Webb Hooper M, Nápoles AM, Pérez-Stable EJ. COVID-19 and racial/ethnic disparities. JAMA. 2020;323(24):2466–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Neumann PJ, Willke RJ, Garrison LP. A health economics approach to US value assessment frameworks: introduction: an ISPOR Special Task Force report [1]. Value Health. 2018;21(2):119–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kim DD, Silver MC, Kunst N, Cohen JT, Ollendorf DA, Neumann PJ. Perspective and costing in cost-effectiveness analysis, 1974–2018. Pharmacoeconomics. 2020;38(10):1135–45.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhang M, Bao Y, Lang Y, Fu S, Kimber M, Levine M, Xie F. What is value in health and healthcare? A systematic literature review of value assessment frameworks. Value Health. 2022;25(2):302–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Culyer AJ. Equity: some theory and its policy implications. J Med Ethics. 2001;27(4):275.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Culyer AJ, Bombard Y. An equity framework for health technology assessments. Med Decis Mak. 2011;32(3):428–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Communities in action: pathways to health equity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24624.

  9. Cookson R, Griffin S, Norheim OF, Culyer AJ, Chalkidou K. Distributional cost-effectiveness analysis comes of age. Value Health. 2021;24(1):118–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Avanceña ALV, Prosser LA. Examining equity effects of health interventions in cost-effectiveness analysis: a systematic review. Value Health. 2021;24(1):136–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ward T, Mujica-Mota RE, Spencer AE, Medina-Lara A. Incorporating equity concerns in cost-effectiveness analyses: a systematic literature review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2022;40(1):45–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jansen JP, Trikalinos TA, Phillips KA. Assessments of the value of new interventions should include health equity impact. Pharmacoeconomics. 2022;40(5):489–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Duran DG, Pérez-Stable EJ. Novel approaches to advance minority health and health disparities research. Am J Public Health. 2019;109(S1):S8-10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Alvidrez J, Castille D, Laude-Sharp M, Rosario A, Tabor D. The National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Research Framework. Am J Public Health. 2019;109(S1):S16-20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Public Broadcasting Service. Driving while black. 2023. https://www.pbs.org/show/driving-while-black/. Accessed 9 July 2023.

  16. Harrington RL, Hanna ML, Oehrlein EM, Camp R, Wheeler R, Cooblall C, et al. Defining patient engagement in research: results of a systematic review and analysis: report of the ISPOR Patient-Centered Special Interest Group. Value Health. 2020;23(6):677–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kauffman KS, Dosreis S, Ross M, Barnet B, Onukwugha E, Mullins CD. Engaging hard-to-reach patients in patient-centered outcomes research. J Comp Eff Res. 2013;2(3):313–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Jagosh J, Bush PL, Salsberg J, Macaulay AC, Greenhalgh T, Wong G, et al. A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research: partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:725.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Mullins CD, Tanveer S, Graham G, Baquet CR. Advancing community-engaged research: increasing trustworthiness within community-academic partnerships. J Comp Eff Res. 2020;9(11):751–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Edwards HA, Huang J, Jansky L, Mullins CD. What works when: mapping patient and stakeholder engagement methods along the ten-step continuum framework. J Comp Eff Res. 2021;10(12):999–1017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sofolahan-Oladeinde Y, Mullins CD, Baquet CR. Using community-based participatory research in patient-centered outcomes research to address health disparities in under-represented communities. J Comp Eff Res. 2015;4(5):515–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Abrams LS. Sampling ‘hard to reach’ populations in qualitative research: the case of incarcerated youth. Qual Soc Work. 2011;9:536–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Bergmans RS, Chambers-Peeple K, Aboul-Hassan D, Dell’Imperio S, Martin A, Wegryn-Jones R, et al. opportunities to improve long COVID care: implications from semi-structured interviews with black patients. Patient. 2022;15(6):715–28.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Jeffries N, Zaslavsky AM, Diez Roux AV, Creswell JW, Palmer RC, Gregorich SE, et al. Methodological approaches to understanding causes of health disparities. Am J Public Health. 2019;109(S1):S28-33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Peters CC. A method of matching groups for experiment with no loss of population. J Educ Res. 1941;34:606–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Belson WA. A technique for studying the effects of a television broadcast. J R Stat Soc Ser C. 1956;5(3):195–202.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Oaxaca R. Male-female wage differentials in urban labor markets. Int Econ Rev. 1973;14(3):693–709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Blinder AS. Wage discrimination: reduced form and structural estimates. J Hum Resour. 1973;8(4):436–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Stewart AL, Nápoles-Springer A. Health-related quality-of-life assessments in diverse population groups in the United States. Med Care. 2000;38(9):II102–24.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mielck A, Vogelmann M, Leidl R. Health-related quality of life and socioeconomic status: inequalities among adults with a chronic disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12(1):58.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Garrison LP, Pauly MV, Willke RJ, Neumann PJ. An overview of value, perspective, and decision context: a health economics approach: an ISPOR Special Task Force report [2]. Value Health. 2018;21(12):124–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Diez-Roux AV. Bringing context back into epidemiology: variables and fallacies in multilevel analysis. Am J Public Health. 1998;88(2):216–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Robinson W. Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. Am Sociol Rev. 1950;15:351–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Shih Y-CT, Bradley C, Yabroff KR. Ecological and individualistic fallacies in health disparities research. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2023;115(5):488–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. McGill E, Er V, Penney T, Egan M, White M, Meier P, et al. Evaluation of public health interventions from a complex systems perspective: a research methods review. Soc Sci Med. 2021;272: 113697.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Reich K, Culross PL, Behrman RE. Children, youth, and gun violence: analysis and recommendations. Future Child. 2002;12(2):5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. West KM. Researcher trustworthiness in community-academic research partnerships: omplications for genomic research. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Seattle, Washington. 2017. p. 1–197.

  38. Dave G, Frerichs L, Jones J, Kim M, Schaal J, Vassar S, et al. Conceptualizing trust in community-academic research partnerships using concept mapping approach: a multi-CTSA study. Eval Program Plann. 2018;66:70–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Parker M, Wallerstein N, Duran B, Magarati M, Burgess E, Sanchez-Youngman S, et al. Engage for equity: development of community-based participatory research tools. Health Educ Behav. 2020;47(3):359–71.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmacotherapy, University of Utah College of Pharmacy, 30 South 2000 East, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA

    T. Joseph Mattingly II

Authors
  1. T. Joseph Mattingly II
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Joseph Mattingly II.

Ethics declarations

Funding

No funding was received for the preparation of this article.

Conflict of interest

T. Joseph Mattingly II discloses unrelated research funding from the US Food and Drug Administration, National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, the ALSAM Foundation, and the Alzheimer’s Association. He also discloses unrelated consulting fees received in the past 24 months from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America and Arnold Ventures.

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Availability of data and material

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Author contributions

All aspects of the manuscript were developed and are the sole opinions of the author (TJM).

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mattingly, T.J. A Research Framework to Improve Health Disparity Evidence Gaps in Value Assessments. PharmacoEconomics 42, 253–259 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-023-01340-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-023-01340-0

Search

Navigation