Joshua T. Cohen

Joshua T. Cohen

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article

Previous Organizations / Institutes

The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years


Joshua T. Cohen has a total of 323 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:

  • Peter J. Neumann

    Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA

    21 shared publications
  • Peter J. Neumann

    Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA

    20 shared publications
  • Susan K. Parsons

    Division of Hematology/Oncology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Center for Health Solutions, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts

    9 shared publications
  • John B. Wong

    From Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts

    7 shared publications
  • Aaron N. Winn

    University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    6 shared publications
  • Angie Mae Rodday

    Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts

    6 shared publications

Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    Cost-effectiveness thresholds used in the United States vs most favored nations

    by Hanxuan Yu, Peter J Neumann, David D Kim, Joshua T Cohen, Ashley A Leech

    Objectives: Cost-effectiveness thresholds inform whether health interventions represent good value for money, yet their use varies across countries. This study compares thresholds cited in published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) in the United States with those in countries designated as the Most Favored Nations (MFNs) under the 2025 President's Executive Order on prescription drug pricing. Methods: We analyzed 6876 cost-per-QALY studies published between 1979 and 2023 from the Tufts CEA Registry. We standardized thresholds as multiples of each country's GDP per capita, and used logistic regression to estimate the probability of citing a threshold >1 × GDP per capita, adjusting for region, intervention type, disease area, and study period. Results: Over time, MFN studies shifted toward citing lower thresholds, whereas US thresholds consistently cited thresholds >1 × GDP per capita. After adjusting for other factors, MFN studies were less likely to cite higher thresholds than US studies. Cancer-related CEAs and CEAs of pharmaceutical interventions were more likely to cite higher thresholds. Conclusions: CEAs in the United States and peer high-income nations cite remarkably different thresholds, with MFNs citing lower value benchmarks over time. Policymakers should be cautious about adopting pricing policies that would implicitly subject US pharmaceutical spending to benchmarks developed in different institutional and fiscal contexts.

  • Are Medical Devices Cost-Effective?

    by James D. Chambers, Madison C. Silver, Flora C. Berklein, Joshua T. Cohen, Peter J. Neumann

    Objective Medical devices can offer important therapeutic advances but, as for any medical interventions, there are questions about their costs and benefits. We examined health benefits and costs for pre-market approved (PMA) devices approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (1999–2015), grouping them by generic category (e.g., drug-eluting stents) and indication. Methods We searched PubMed for incremental health gain estimates [measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] and incremental costs for each device category compared to previously available treatments. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios by dividing the average incremental costs by the average incremental QALY gains. In sensitivity analysis, we repeated the analysis when excluding industry-funded studies. Results We identified at least one relevant cost-utility or comparative-effectiveness study for 88 devices (15.9% of non-cosmetic devices approved from 1999 to 2015), and at least one device across 53 (26.2%) generic categories. The median (mean) incremental cost across generic device categories was $1701 ($13,320). The median (mean) incremental health gain across generic device categories was 0.13 (0.46) QALYs. We found that cost-effectiveness ratios for 36 of 53 (68%) and 43 of 53 (81%) device categories fell below (were more favorable than) $50,000 and $150,000 per QALY, respectively. Results were roughly similar when we excluded industry-funded studies. Conclusions We found that roughly one-quarter of the major PMA medical device categories have published cost-effectiveness evidence accessible through a large, publicly available database. Available evidence suggests that devices generally offer good value, as judged relative to established cost-effectiveness benchmarks.


  • Open Access

    Approximate Bayesian Computation for an Explicit-Duration Hidden Markov Model of COVID-19 Hospital Trajectories

    by Gian Marco Visani, Alexandra Hope Lee, Cuong Nguyen, David M. Kent, John B. Wong, Joshua T. Cohen, Michael C. Hughes

    We address the problem of modeling constrained hospital resources in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic in order to inform decision-makers of future demand and assess the societal value of possible interventions. For broad applicability, we focus on the common yet challenging scenario where patient-level data for a region of interest are not available. Instead, given daily admissions counts, we model aggregated counts of observed resource use, such as the number of patients in the general ward, in the intensive care unit, or on a ventilator. In order to explain how individual patient trajectories produce these counts, we propose an aggregate count explicit-duration hidden Markov model, nicknamed the ACED-HMM, with an interpretable, compact parameterization. We develop an Approximate Bayesian Computation approach that draws samples from the posterior distribution over the model's transition and duration parameters given aggregate counts from a specific location, thus adapting the model to a region or individual hospital site of interest. Samples from this posterior can then be used to produce future forecasts of any counts of interest. Using data from the United States and the United Kingdom, we show our mechanistic approach provides competitive probabilistic forecasts for the future even as the dynamics of the pandemic shift. Furthermore, we show how our model provides insight about recovery probabilities or length of stay distributions, and we suggest its potential to answer challenging what-if questions about the societal value of possible interventions.

  • Open Access

    Modelling the potential cost-effectiveness of food-based programs to reduce malnutrition

    by Patrick Webb, Goodarz Danaei, William A. Masters, Katherine L. Rosettie, Ashley A. Leech, Joshua Cohen, Mia Blakstad, Sarah Kranz, Dariush Mozaffarian


  • Does the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review Revise Its Findings in Response to Industry Comments?

    by Joshua T. Cohen, Madison C. Silver, Daniel A. Ollendorf, Peter J. Neumann


  • Open Access

    Correction to: Publication of Decision Model Source Code: Attitudes of Health Economics Authors

    by Joanna Emerson, Rachel Bacon, Alma Kent, Peter J. Neumann, Joshua T. Cohen

    The article Artificial recharge of a shallow hard rock aquiferas a climate change mitigation method.

  • Open Access

    Cost-effectiveness analysis of three algorithms for diagnosing primary ciliary dyskinesia: a simulation study

    by Panayiotis Kouis, Stefania I. Papatheodorou, Nicos Middleton, George Giallouros, Kyriacos Kyriacou, Joshua T. Cohen, John S. Evans, Panayiotis K. Yiallouros

    Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia (PCD) diagnosis relies on a combination of tests which may include (a) nasal Nitric Oxide (nNO), (b) High Speed Video Microscopy (HSVM) and (c) Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM). There is variability in the availability of these tests and lack of universal agreement whether diagnostic tests should be performed in sequence or in parallel. We assessed three combinations of tests for PCD diagnosis and estimated net sensitivity and specificity as well as cost-effectiveness (CE) and incremental cost-effectiveness (ICE) ratios. A hypothetical initial population of 1000 referrals (expected 320 PCD patients) was followed through a probabilistic decision analysis model which was created to assess the CE of three diagnostic algorithms (a) nNO + TEM in sequence, (b) nNO + HSVM in sequence and (c) nNO/HSVM in parallel followed, in cases with conflicting results, by confirmatory TEM (nNO/HSVM+TEM). Number of PCD patients identified, CE and ICE ratios were calculated using Monte Carlo simulations. Out of 320 expected PCD patients, 313 were identified by nNO/HSVM+TEM, 274 with nNO + HSVM and 198 with nNO + TEM. The nNO/HSVM+TEM had the highest mean annual cost (€209 K) followed by nNO + TEM (€150 K) and nNO + HSVM (€136 K). The nNO + HSVM algorithm dominated the nNO + TEM algorithm (less costly and more effective). The ICE ratio for nNO/HSVM+TEM was €2.1 K per additional PCD patient identified. The diagnostic algorithm (nNO/HSVM+TEM) with parallel testing outperforms algorithms with tests in sequence. These findings, can inform the dialogue on the development of evidence-based guidelines for PCD diagnostic testing. Future research in understudied aspects of the disease, such as PCD-related quality of life and PCD-associated costs, is needed to help the better implementation of these guidelines across various healthcare systems.