Grace Hatfield
In 2024, researchers used the CEA Registry to support more than 60 research articles. Topics ranged from cost-effectiveness analyses of specific interventions to health benefit package design to novel syntheses of economic data. Here are a few memorable articles from last year:
- Silke et al. addresses the lack of country-specific CEAs in the paper "Cost-effectiveness of interventions for HIV/AIDS, malaria, syphilis, and tuberculosis in 128 countries: a meta-regression analysis". The authors conducted a meta-regression of available CEAs from the CEA Registry to predict incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for 14 recommended interventions in individual countries. The findings provide valuable information to help decision makers allocate limited resources toward interventions that will provide the largest population health benefits.
- Dunn et al. used the CEA Registry to estimate QALY gains from treatments for 13 conditions and analyzed insurance claims data to estimate spending for each of these treatments in their paper “How Much Are Medical Innovations Worth? A Detailed Analysis Using Cost-Effectiveness Studies.” They found that innovative interventions are more widely adopted but can lead to short-term population health losses when pricing does not align with clinical benefits. In the long term, however, genericization leads to even greater benefits to patients and society.
- Do et al. estimated health utilities for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) patients with the CEA Registry by gathering available utility values and comparing them to those of clinically-similar conditions in their the paper “Cataloging health state utility estimates for Duchenne muscular dystrophy and related conditions.” The authors demonstrated a novel approach to estimate utilities for diseases with little to no utility data.
- Simangolwa et al used the CEA Registry and other sources for a systematic review of economic analyses conducted in Zambia in their paper “Health technology assessment to support health benefits package design: a systematic review of economic evaluation evidence in Zambia.” Their research can be used to support the implementation of a national health benefits package for Zambia, as well as to provide a roadmap to promote consistency of future economic evaluations and to identify other disease areas where local HTAs are needed to inform policy.
- Xie et al used the CEA Registry to empirically examine whether QALYs discriminate against the elderly in their article “Do Quality-Adjusted Life-Years Discriminate Against the Elderly? An Empirical Analysis of Published Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.” They found no systematic difference between ICERs of interventions for those under and over 65 years old.
Visit the CEA Registry at https://cear.tuftsmedicalcenter.org/.