(15 points) The medical evidence is clear: Cervical cancer screening saves lives
ID: 1140503 • Letter: #
Question
(15 points) The medical evidence is clear: Cervical cancer screening saves lives. Much of the focus of cost-effectiveness research addresses issues concerning the appropriate screening interval. D.M. Eddy (Screening for cervical cancer, Annals of Internal Medicine 113, 214-226, 1990) studied the issue and estimated that annual screening for a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 22-year-old women screened until age 75 would cost $1,093,000 and would save 27.6 life years. If screened every three years instead, the cost would be $467,000 and 26.8 life years would be saved. Is annual screening cost effective? Explain.
ICER = 1093000-467000/27.6-26.8 = $782,500
(20 points) Cutler (2007) uses cost-effectiveness analysis to measure the value of revascularization (bypass surgery or angioplasty) after a heart attack. According to his estimates, the cost effectiveness for this medical technology is $33,246 per life-year saved. Is this procedure cost effective? Why or why not? Would your answer change if the cost per life-year saved was double that amount?
Explanation / Answer
The law of diminishing marginal utility is a law of economics stating that as a person increases consumption of a product while keeping consumption of other products constant, there is a decline in the marginal utility that person derives from consuming each additional unit of that product.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.