Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative Effectiveness and Child Health

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

Abstract

Comparative effectiveness research is expected to play an important role in future clinical and policy decision making in the US; however, the application of comparative effectiveness methodologies to child health requires special attention to aspects of health and healthcare that are specific to children. These special considerations include the role of parent/caregiver as joint decision maker and co-participant in many types of interventions, how the effectiveness of an intervention varies by age and developmental stage, and the difficulties in translating short-term data from childhood into projected effectiveness over the lifespan. Each aspect of comparative effectiveness, such as conducting new studies, synthesizing existing evidence, emphasizing real-world settings, considering multiple decision makers, and measuring patient-relevant outcomes, will require expanded definitions when considered in the context of child health.

This paper discusses how comparative effectiveness methods and concepts will differ when applied to child health and suggests a potential role for decision analysis as a method to synthesize data and project long-term outcomes. The initiation of comparative effectiveness studies for children represents an exciting opportunity to provide evidence that can guide clinical and policy decisions for child health.

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

Table I

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sox HC. Comparative effectiveness research: a progress report. Ann Intern Med. 2010 Oct 5; 153(7): 469–72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sullivan P, Goldmann D. The promise of comparative effectiveness research. JAMA 2011 Jan 26; 305(4): 400–1

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. What is comparative effectiveness research [online]. Available from URL: http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/index.cfm/what-is-comparative-effectiveness-research1/ [Accessed 2011 Sep 8]

  4. Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research. Report to the President and the Congress. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, 2009 Jun 30 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.hhs.gov/recovery/programs/cer/cerannualrpt.pdf [Accessed 2012 May 18]

    Google Scholar 

  5. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Initial national priorities for comparative effectiveness research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2009 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2009/ComparativeEffectivenessResearchPriorities.aspx [Accessed 2011 Sep 8]

    Google Scholar 

  6. Mayer D. Essential evidence-based medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hennekens C, Buring J. Epidemiology in medicine: Boston (MA): Little, Brown and Company, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  8. Guiding comparative effectiveness research — a US perspective: an interview between Howard Birnbaum (of Analysis Group, Inc., and guest co-editor of this special issue) and Jean R. Slutsky (Director, Center for Outcomes and Evidence, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality). Pharmacoeconomics 2010; 28 (10): 839–42

  9. Wilensky GR. Developing a center for comparative effectiveness information. Health Affair 2006 Nov–Dec; 25(6): w572–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Neumann PJ. What next for QALYs? JAMA 2011 May 4; 305(17): 1806–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Weinstein MC, Skinner JA. Comparative effectiveness and health care spending: implications for reform. N Engl J Med 2010 Feb 4; 362(5): 460–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Garber AM, Sox HC. The role of costs in comparative effectiveness research. Health Affair 2010 Oct; 29(10): 1805–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sobo EJ, Kurtin PS, editors. Child health services research. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  14. Forrest CB, Simpson L, Clancy C. Child health services research: challenges and opportunities. JAMA 1997 Jun 11; 277(22): 1787–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Drotar D, editor. Measuring health-related quality of life in adolescents: implications for research and practice. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ungar WJ, editor. Economic evaluation in child health. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mullins CD, Whicher D, Reese ES, et al. Generating evidence for comparative effectiveness research using more pragmatic randomized controlled trials. Pharmacoeconomics 2010; 28(10): 969–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Schmier J, King J, Nichol K, et al. Benefits and costs of immunizing children against influenza at school: an economic analysis based on a large-cluster controlled clinical trial. Health Affair 2008; 27(2): w96–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. King Jr JC, Stoddard JJ, Gaglani MJ, et al. Effectiveness of school-based influenza vaccination. N Engl J Med 2006 Dec 14; 355(24): 2523–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Culyer AJ. Perspective and desire in comparative effectiveness research: the relative unimportance of mere preferences, the central importance of context. Pharmacoeconomics 2010; 28(10): 889–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Prosser LA, Hammitt JK, Keren R. Measuring health preferences for use in cost-utility and cost-benefit analyses of interventions in children: theoretical and methodological considerations. Pharmacoeconomics 2007; 25(9): 713–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Petrou S. Should health gains by children be given the same value as health gains by adults in an economic evaluation framework? In: Ungar WJ, editor. Economic evaluation in child health. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010: 271–87

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ungar WJ, Gerber A. The uniqueness of child health and challenges to measuring costs and consequences. In: Ungar WJ, editor. Economic evaluation in child health. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010: 3–32

    Google Scholar 

  24. Haddix AC, Teutsch SM, Corso PS. Prevention effectiveness: a guide to decision analysis and economic evaluation. 2nd rev. ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  25. Goldie SJ, Corso PS. Decision analysis. In: Haddix AC, Teutsch SM, Corso PS, editors. Prevention effectiveness: a guide to decision analysis and economic evaluation. 2nd rev. ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003: 103–26

    Google Scholar 

  26. Weinstein MC. Clinical decision analysis. Philadelphia (PA): Saunders, 1980

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hunink MGM, Glasziou PP, Siegel JE, et al. Decision making in health and medicine: integrating evidence and values. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001

    Google Scholar 

  28. Caro JJ, Ishak KJ. No head-to-head trial? Simulate the missing arms. Pharmacoeconomics 2010; 28(10): 957–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Mandelblatt JS, Cronin KA, Bailey S, et al. Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: model estimates of potential benefits and harms. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151(10): 738–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kong CY, Lee JM, McMahon PM, et al. Using radiation risk models in cancer screening simulations: important assumptions and effects on outcome projections. Radiology 2012; 262(3): 977–84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Prosser LA, Kuntz KM, Bar-Or A, et al. Cost-effectiveness of interferon beta-1a, interferon beta-1b, and glatiramer acetate in newly diagnosed non-primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Value Health 2004; 7(5): 554–68

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Prosser LA, Stinnett AA, Goldman PA, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cholesterol-lowering therapies according to selected patient characteristics. Ann Intern Med 2000; 132(10): 768–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Prosser LA, Kong CY, Rusinak D, et al. Projected costs, risks, and benefits of expanded newborn screening for MCADD. Pediatrics 2010; 125(2): e286–94

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wang YC, Cheung AM, Bibbins-Domingo K, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of blood pressure screening in adolescents in the United States. J Pediatr 2011 Feb; 158(2): 257–64, e 1–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Vijgen SMC, Hoogendoorn M, Baan CA, et al. Cost effectiveness of preventive interventions in type 2 diabetes melliltus. Pharmacoeconomics 2006; 24(5): 426–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wang YC. Estimating the energy gap among US children: a counterfactual approach. Pediatrics 2006; 118: 1721–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Prosser LA, Grosse SD, Kemper AR, et al. Decision analysis, economic evaluation, and newborn screening: challenges and opportunities. Genet Med 2012. Epub 2012 Apr 5

  38. Owens DK, Qaseem A, Chou R, et al. High-value, cost-conscious health care: concepts for clinicians to evaluatethe benefits, harms, and costs of medical interventions. Ann Intern Med 2011 Feb 1; 154(3): 174–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Qaseem A, Snow V, Owens DK, et al. The development of clinical practice guidelines and guidance statements of the American College of Physicians: summary of methods. Ann Intern Med 2010 Aug 3; 153(3): 194–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Simpson LA, Peterson L, Lannon CM, et al. Special challenges in comparative effectiveness research on children’s and adolescents’ health. Health Affair 2010 Oct; 29(10): 1849–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Landrigan PJ, Trasande L, Thorpe LE, et al. The National Children’s Study: a 21-year prospective study of 100,000 American children. Pediatrics 2006 Nov; 118(5): 2173–86

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

No funding was received from any external organizations for this paper. The author has no conflicts of interest to disclose and the findings and conclusions in this paper are those of the author.

This paper is part of a theme issue co-edited by Lisa Prosser, University of Michigan, USA, and no external funding was used to support the publication of this theme issue.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Child Health Evaluation and Research Unit, Division of General Pediatrics, University of Michigan Health System, 300 North Ingalls Street, Room 6E14, SPC 5456, Ann Arbor, Michigan, MI 48109, USA

    Lisa A. Prosser PhD

  2. Department of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Lisa A. Prosser PhD

Authors
  1. Lisa A. Prosser PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lisa A. Prosser PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Prosser, L.A. Comparative Effectiveness and Child Health. PharmacoEconomics 30, 637–645 (2012). https://doi.org/10.2165/11633830-000000000-00000

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/11633830-000000000-00000

Keywords

Search

Navigation