TY - JOUR
T1 - Use of the Term Cost Effective
AU - Ludbrook, Anne
AU - Fahs, Marianne C.
AU - Doubilet, Peter M.
AU - Weinstein, Milton C.
AU - McNeil, Barbara J.
PY - 1986/6/19
Y1 - 1986/6/19
N2 - To the Editor: Although it was welcome, the Occasional Notes article on the misuse of the term “cost effective” (Jan. 23 issue)* has to some extent added to the confusion by presenting a definition different from that commonly applied by economists, at least on this side of the Atlantic. The authors rightly criticize the use of the term to mean either “cost saving” or “effective.” In their subsequent argument, however, they fail to distinguish between two forms of economic evaluation: cost-effectiveness analysis and cost–benefit analysis. The distinction that economists draw between these relates directly to definitions 3 and 4 as…
AB - To the Editor: Although it was welcome, the Occasional Notes article on the misuse of the term “cost effective” (Jan. 23 issue)* has to some extent added to the confusion by presenting a definition different from that commonly applied by economists, at least on this side of the Atlantic. The authors rightly criticize the use of the term to mean either “cost saving” or “effective.” In their subsequent argument, however, they fail to distinguish between two forms of economic evaluation: cost-effectiveness analysis and cost–benefit analysis. The distinction that economists draw between these relates directly to definitions 3 and 4 as…
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0022633051&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1056/NEJM198606193142518
DO - 10.1056/NEJM198606193142518
M3 - Letter
C2 - 3086722
AN - SCOPUS:0022633051
SN - 0028-4793
VL - 314
SP - 1645
EP - 1646
JO - New England Journal of Medicine
JF - New England Journal of Medicine
IS - 25
ER -