ArticleWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2019
The status of health economic evaluation within decision making in Austria.
Article in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital navigation as an access barrier: waiting times, equity, and universal health coverage in a digitalizing health system.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The role of health economics within health technology assessment: past, present, and future - an Austrian perspective.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Review
- Assessing social protection influence on health status in the European Union.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- A novel set of Austrian reference unit costs for comprehensive societal perspectives consistent with latest European costing methods for economic evaluations.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2024Article
- Rationing in healthcare-a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Unit Costs in Health Economic Evaluations: Quo Vadis, Austria?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- Harmonization issues in unit costing of service use for multi-country, multi-sectoral health economic evaluations: a scoping review.Health economics review · 2022Article
- "Slow science" for 21st century healthcare: reinventing health service research that serves fast-paced, high-complexity care organisations.Journal of health organization and management · 2021Article
- Barriers and facilitators to conducting economic evaluation studies of Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries: a survey of researchers.Health research policy and systems · 2021Article
- Embedding an economist in regional and rural health services to add value and reduce waste by improving local-level decision-making: protocol for the 'embedded Economist' program and evaluation.BMC health services research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGiven limited resources compared to the demand for them, spending resources efficiently is important. Key methods applied for supporting efficient resource allocation are health economic evaluations.
methodsBased on secondary literature, we analyze international challenges for using two types of economic evaluations-cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-utility analysis-in reimbursement decisions and reflect on them for the Austrian case.
resultsThe main challenges with the application of economic evaluations are related to the methods, the decision-making culture, and the respective system. The challenges also apply to the Austrian Bismarck system, where almost no formal requirements for using economic evaluations exist, except on a case-by-case basis. Resource allocation in Austria hence occurs, for the most part, implicitly.
conclusionOne way forward towards more explicit efficiency considerations may be to consider more descriptive study types and foster capacity building, standardization of methods and presentation of results, and a mandatory detailed guideline.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.