Expanding Measures of Benefit in Socioeconomic Studies

  • B. R. Luce
Conference paper
Part of the Health Systems Research book series (HEALTH)


The purpose of socioeconomic studies of pharmaceutical interventions is to estimate analytically the value of those interventions. That valuation process should include all relevant costs and consequences, including side effects, risks, and benefits over all relevant time periods. Often, however, important consequences are not adequately considered by an analysis, which may result in misleading or the misinterpretation of results. Despite increasing interest [6] and methodological advances in the measurement of quality of life in drug studies, many otherwise methodologically sound socioeconomic studies do not include quality of life components, even when their inclusion could make a difference in the interpretation of value.


Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator Psychometric Scale Valuation Process Relevant Time Period Socioeconomic Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Croog SH, Levine S, Testa MA et al. (1986) The effects of antihypertensive therapy on the quality of life. New Engl J Med 314:1657–1664PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Drummond MF, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW (1987) Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Edelson JT, Weinstein MC, Tosteson ANA et al. (1990) Long-term cost-effectiveness of various initial monotherapies for mild to moderate hypertension. JAMA 263:407–113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kupperman M, Luce BR, McGovern B et al. (1990) An analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the implantable cardiac defibrillator. Circulation 81:91–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Luce BR, Elixhauser A (1990) Standards for socioeconomic evaluation of health care products and services. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York TokyoGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Luce BR, Weschler JM, Underwood C (1989) The use of quality-of-life measures in the private sector. In: Mosteller F, Falotico-Taylor J (ed) Quality of life and technology assessment. National Academy Press, Washington DC, pp. 55–64Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stason WB, Weinstein MC (1977) Public health rounds at the Harvard School of Public Health. New Engl J Med 296:732–739PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Warner KE, Luce BR (1982) Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis in health care: principles, practice and potential. Health Administration Press, University of MichiganGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weinstein MC (1980) Estrogen use in postmonopausal women: Costs, risks, and benefits. New Engl J Med 303:308–316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. R. Luce

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations