방법 비교
선택한 방법을 나란히 검토하세요. 서로 다른 행은 강조 표시됩니다.
| 비용-편익 분석(CBA)× | 비용효과 분석 (CEA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| 분야 | 보건경제학 | 보건경제학 |
| 계열 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 기원 연도≠ | 1970s | 1984 |
| 창시자≠ | Boardman, Greenberg, and colleagues (welfare economics) | Drummond & Stoddart (Health Economics Research Group, McMaster University) |
| 유형 | Method | Method |
| 원전≠ | Boardman, A. E., Greenberg, D. H., Vining, A. R., & Weimer, D. L. (2018). Cost-Benefit Analysis: Concepts and Practice (5th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. link ↗ | Gold, M. R., Siegel, J. E., Russell, L. B., & Weinstein, M. C. (Eds.). (1996). Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press. link ↗ |
| 별칭 | CBA, economic appraisal, benefit-cost ratio | CEA, ICER, Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio |
| 관련 | 5 | 5 |
| 요약≠ | Cost-benefit analysis compares the total monetary value of benefits produced by a program against its total monetary costs, reporting net present value (NPV) or benefit-cost ratio (BCR). Rooted in welfare economics and used extensively in public policy (transportation, environmental, education, health), CBA answers the question: 'Is this program worth doing from a societal perspective?' Unlike cost-effectiveness analysis, CBA monetizes both costs and benefits, enabling comparison across disparate program types. | Cost-effectiveness analysis compares the incremental cost per unit of health benefit gained by one intervention relative to a comparator (standard care or best alternative). Developed rigorously in the 1980s by Drummond, Stoddart, and colleagues, CEA is now the standard framework for technology appraisal globally. NICE, HAS, CADTH, and other health technology assessment bodies use CEA to decide which treatments warrant public funding and at what price. |
| ScholarGate데이터셋 ↗ |
|
|