That’s the questions Peter Neumann and David Kim (2023) reply of their JAMA analysis letter printed right this moment. They use 1990-2021 knowledge from the Tufts Medical Heart CEA Registry. The outcomes are summarized within the graphs under.
First, we see using a specific value effectiveness threshold rising over time, from solely 45% of printed research to 91% of all research. Second, the cost-effectiveness thresholds have elevated over time. Whereas 43.6% of research reporting a CEA threshold used a $50,000/QALY threshold within the Nineties, now solely 13.8% of research use that threshold; whereas 0% of research used $150,000/QALY threshold within the Nineties, now 25.9% of research achieve this.
The authors additionally notice that:
- Most cancers-related CEAs referenced greater thresholds than non-cancer CEAs, which can counsel a view that interventions for ailments related to larger mortality and morbidity warrant greater thresholds.
- Authors of industry-funded analyses are likely to reference greater thresholds.
You possibly can learn the total paper here.