方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 成本效益分析 (CBA)× | 成本-效益分析 (CEA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 卫生经济学 | 卫生经济学 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1970s | 1984 |
| 提出者≠ | Boardman, Greenberg, and colleagues (welfare economics) | Drummond & Stoddart (Health Economics Research Group, McMaster University) |
| 类型 | Method | Method |
| 开创性文献≠ | 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 ↗ |
| 别名 | CBA, economic appraisal, benefit-cost ratio | CEA, ICER, Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio |
| 相关 | 5 | 5 |
| 摘要≠ | 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. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|