PUBH 430 Health Economics Assignment

PUBH 430 Health Economics Assignment

Instructions/Descriptions

PUBH 430 Health Economics Assignment

[Order Now]

Fall 2022

Assignment

Total marks = 50 (15%)

(A trial-based Economic evaluation study)

Instructions for preparing and submitting the assignment

1. The assignment is designed to investigate students’ learning on economic evaluation

alongside a randomized controlled trial (RCT), using a published study from the

literature.

2. To get full marks, you need to provide adequate but relevant information while

answering these questions

3. The students are being provided with the economic evaluation study from the literature which

they will read, learn and practice at home and prepare the assignment.

4. The test involves a number of questions developed from the published study and students are

required to answer these question.

5. The assignment has a total marks of 50, and a weight of 15% of the Full Final Grades.
6. The study title is –

“A cost effectiveness analysis within a randomised controlled trial of

post-acute care of older people in a community hospital” by Jacqueline O’Reilly,

Karin Lowson, John Young, Anne Forster, John Green, Neil Small, BMJ,

doi:10.1136/bmj.38887.558576.7C

2

Assignment Questions

Question -1: (3+1+2=6 marks)

1. a) Discuss the main motivations of this trial-based cost-effectiveness study by O’Reilly et al.
2. b) What perspective for the economic evaluation was considered in the study?
3. c) Has the study applied a discounting of costs and effects in the cost-effectiveness analysis? If

yes or no, justify your answer

Question -2: (7×2= 14 marks)

Identify and briefly describe briefly the following PICO terms of the cost-effectiveness analysis

in the study.

Patient/Population ____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

Intervention__________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

Control_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

Outcome_____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

Duration of the Economic Evaluation

period________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

3

No. of patients randomized to ‘Intervention’ group__________________________________

No. of patients randomized to ‘Control’ group ______________________________________

Question -3: (5+ 2+ 3=10 marks)

1. a) Discuss in details ( at least in 5 sentences) how health outcome (quality of life (QoL) and

Quality Adjusted Life Year, QALY) data were captured in the study

1. b) How health care resources use data were collected in the study?
2. c) State five (5) different types of primary and hospital care resources use considered in the costeffectiveness study

Question -4: (4+3+3= 10 marks)

In Table 1, the study shows that, from ‘all patients’ analysis the average observed QALY over 6

months study period in the community hospital group is 0.38 and the observed QALY in the

district hospital group is 0.35. However, the difference (95% CI) in QALY over 6 months

between two groups is 0.06 (-0.05 to 0.18).

1. i) How does the study estimate this difference in QALY between two groups? State in

TWO sentences?

1. ii) What are the main impacts on health outcome (QALY) by considering two approaches of

analyses – ‘all patients’ and ‘surviving patients’?

iii) Is the difference in QALY between two treatment groups statistically significant or not?

Justify your answer in TWO sentences.

4

Question -5: (2+4 + 2+1 +1=10 marks)

1. a) Based on results presented in the study, state the average costs and effects (QALYs) over 6

months study period between two options, and indicate which treatment option is more

cost-effective in the ‘base case’ cost-effectiveness analysis and why (state in THREE

sentences)?

1. b) Discuss various sensitivity analyses (both deterministic and stochastic) methods adopted in

the study

[Order Now]

1. c) Discuss how various sensitivity analyses showed differential cost-effectiveness results

from the ‘base case’ analysis?

1. d) Figure 2 on page no. 4 is showing the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC),

representing the sensitivity analysis in probability term. If the policy makers is willing to

pay (WTP) £10000 per QALY, then what is the probability that community hospital care

would be more cost-effective than district hospital care?

1. e) If the policy makers increases the WTP threshold to £30000 per QALY, there is a small

decrease in probability that community hospital care would be more cost-effective than

district hospital care – TRUE or FALSE

PUBH 430 Health Economics Assignment

RUBRIC Excellent Quality 95-100%   Introduction 45-41 points The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed. Literature Support 91-84  points The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed. Methodology 58-53 points With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached. Average Score 50-85% 40-38 points More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied. 83-76  points There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration. 52-49  points The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached. Poor Quality 0-45% 37-1 points The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied. 75-1 points There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references. 48-1 points There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached. PUBH 430 Health Economics Assignment Place the Order Here: https://standardwriter.com/orders/ordernow / https://standardwriter.com/

PUBH 430 Health Economics Assignment

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!