Purpose of This Assignment The primary purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate your ability to interpret and critically appraise published economic evaluations. At the master’s level, there is a stronger emphasis on research skills both conducting

Purpose of This Assignment

The primary purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate your ability to interpret and critically appraise published economic evaluations. At the master’s level, there is a stronger emphasis on research skills both conducting research and critically reading original studies.

Through this assignment, you will demonstrate your ability to:

• Interpret health economics evidence
• Identify strengths and weaknesses of economic evaluations
• Reflect on the generalisability of published findings
• Consider implications for decision-makers
• Analyse and critically evaluate research evidence
• Apply critical thinking skills to economic evaluation literature

Due Date

• Submission Deadline: 6:00 PM, Sunday, 31st August 2025

Assignment Questions

You must choose one of the following economic evaluation articles for analysis:

Option 1

Harris A. et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Telehealth-Delivered Exercise and Dietary Weight Loss Programs for Knee Osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res. 2023.

Option 2

Williams EV. et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of early detection and bundled treatment of postpartum hemorrhage alongside the E-MOTIVE trial. Nat Med. 2024.

Option 3

Tafazzoli A. et al. The Potential Value-Based Price of a Multi-Cancer Early Detection Genomic Blood Test. Pharmacoeconomics. 2022.

QUESTION 1 

Critical Appraisal Using the Drummond Checklist

Assess the quality of your selected economic evaluation using the Drummond checklist. For each of the 10 main criteria, you must:

• Begin your answer with: Yes / No / Mixed / Cannot tell
• Provide brief justification using direct evidence from the article

You are NOT required to answer every sub-question, as not all sub-points may apply. They are only prompts to help you think.

Your evaluation must be specific, evidence-based, and concise.

Main Drummond Checklist Criteria

1. Was a well-defined question posed in an answerable form?
2. Was a comprehensive description of the competing alternatives given?
3. Was the effectiveness of the programmes or services established?
4. Were all important and relevant costs and consequences identified?
5. Were costs and consequences measured accurately in appropriate units?
6. Were costs and consequences valued credibly?
7. Were they adjusted for differential timing (discounting)?
8. Was an incremental analysis of costs and consequences performed?
9. Was uncertainty adequately characterized?
10. Did the presentation and discussion include all issues of concern to users?

 

QUESTION 2 

Generalisability

Critically discuss how generalisable the study findings are:

• To different health systems
• To varied populations
• To different delivery settings
• Considering context, demographics, cost structures, etc.

Justify clearly using theory and article-specific evidence.

QUESTION 3

Decision-Maker Perspective

Discuss:

1. Who the likely funding decision-maker(s) are, such as:
   • Government health departments
   • Insurers
   • Hospital administrators
   • National screening bodies
   • Public health agencies
2. What other considerations they would examine, beyond economic evidence:
   • Budget constraints
   • Feasibility and capacity
   • Ethical and equity issues
   • Implementation barriers
   • Stakeholder acceptability
   • Long-term sustainability
3. Whether the intervention should be funded, based on:
   • Study outcomes
   • Cost-effectiveness
   • Uncertainty
   • Feasibility in real-world settings
   • Broader policy priorities

Provide a clear recommendation supported by evidence.