Digby Simpson

Over the past five years, researchers have significantly advanced our understanding of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our knowledge regarding COVID-19 has expanded beyond its initial asso...

Background and Objectives: Recently, cost-benefit analysis has been increasingly used to evaluate the value of interventions for dementia. This study aims to synthesize the methodology used in cost-benefit analysis (CBA) for dementia interventions. Research Design and Methods: We conducted a scoping review with comprehensive systematic searches for original peer-reviewed articles published from January 2010 to December 2023, and included the studies if they (1) performed a CBA of interventions for dementia, (2) described either cost or benefit items, and (3) performed quantitative data analysis on either costs or benefits. The review adhered to the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist to write the report. Results: Of the 3415 articles found from the search, 15 were included in the review. Data analysis included the traditional CBA approach and its integration with the social return on investment approach. The set of cost and benefit items may vary depending on the intervention. Staff training, intervention supplies, building hire, and transportation were common cost items. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY), general practitioner visits, and emergency room visits were common benefit items. Cost data were often sourced from the study budget/assumptions. Benefit data were often sourced from the social value banks and literature. Market and shadow pricing were used for cost valuation. The value of statistical life was frequently used for benefit valuation. Discussion and Implications: This review synthesized data analysis methods, lists of cost and benefit items, data sources, and valuation methods used in the CBA of interventions for dementia. The findings provide helpful information for considering methodology in future CBA of interventions for dementia and similar interventions or conditions.

Over the last five years, since the emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, researchers have significantly expanded our understanding of COVID-19, moving beyond respiratory symptoms to include other health complications, such as acute kidney injury (AKI) [1–4]. Many studies have shown that AKI is common among patients with COVID-19 [1–3,5]. […]

Digital transformation is expensive and rarely smooth, often leading to higher costs than anticipated. It is challenging to demonstrate the contribution of digital health investment in achieving the healthcare aims of population health and workforce sustainability. We conducted a scoping review to understand how electronic medical record (EMR) implementations in the hospital setting have been evaluated using cost–benefit analysis (CBA) approaches. The review search resulted in 1184 unique articles, a final list of 28 was collated of which 20 were US-based studies. All studies were published in 2010–2019, with fewer studies published in more recent years. The data used to estimate benefits and costs were dated from 1996 to 2016, with most data from 2000 to 2010. Only three studies were qualified as using cost–benefit analysis approaches. While studies indicated that there is a positive impact from the EMR implementation, the impacts measured varied greatly. We concluded that the current literature demonstrates a lack of appropriate and comprehensive economic frameworks to understand the value of digital hospital implementations. Additionally, most studies failed to align fully to the quadruple aims of healthcare: they focused either on cost savings and/or improved patient outcomes and population health, none investigated healthcare-workforce sustainability.