On approximations in treatment costing
- 1 January 1995
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Health Economics
- Vol. 4 (1) , 31-39
- https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4730040104
Abstract
As detailed costing may be a time‐consuming and expensive exercise within an evaluation, economists will be conscious of the possibilities of taking short‐cuts. To explore the viability of such approaches in the context of acute care (the surgical treatment for colorectal cancer), we compare the results of a detailed costing study with reduced list costing and econometric estimation. We conclude, first, that use of a reduced list is likely to generate substantial research economies only at the expense of inaccuracy. Second, crude costing, based upon average costs of the specialty, is acceptable when the frame of reference is the aggregate. Such crude costing, however, is vulnerable to bias when specific sub‐samples of patients are to be considered. Finally, total costs are predictable from a restricted list of cost and event variables, and with a high degree of accuracy, although ex ante specification of the functional form is problematic.Keywords
This publication has 4 references indexed in Scilit:
- Reduced list costings: Examination of an informed short cut in mental health researchHealth Economics, 1993
- Screening and the costs of treating colorectal cancerBritish Journal of Cancer, 1993
- The costing of nursing care: a study of 65 colorectal cancer patientsJournal of Advanced Nursing, 1990
- Specialty Costs in English Hospitals — A Statistical Approach Based upon a Cost Component ModelJournal of the Operational Research Society, 1984