Document Detail


Is medical research cost effective? Response to Murphy and Topel.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  14563079     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
The paper explores the relationship between medical innovation and cost of treatment. The methodology used by Murphy and Topel to calculate the statistical value of a life is examined. The authors discuss possible confounding factors, such as the general trend of decreasing mortality, and consider the possibility that non-medical sources, especially the decrease in tobacco use, may explain much of the decrease in mortality rates. The authors suggest an alternative to Murphy and Topel's population-level model for assessing the benefits of medical technology, based on Lewis Thomas' categorization of three levels of technology: non-technology ("caring"), half-way technology (does not reverse or prevent the underlying problem), and high technology (preventative or curative). The categories are applied to the example of type 1 diabetes mellitus, in which quality of life and mortality improvements are clearly the result of technological changes and not behavioral modifications. The authors emphasize the cost-effectiveness of high technology, which is based on medical research advances.
Authors:
Mark Siegler; Alix Weisfeld; David Cronin
Related Documents :
10295519 - Expensive medical and surgical technology.
8056009 - Clinical use of stress echocardiography: factors affecting diagnostic accuracy.
3612699 - Death with dignity and the right to die: sometimes doctors have a duty to hasten death.
11314499 - Resorbable polymer fixation for craniomaxillofacial surgery: development and engineerin...
18575169 - Ethical decisions at the edge.
16704509 - Rules for medical markets: the impact of medicare contractors on coverage policies.
9001749 - Patients' attitudes toward having been forcibly medicated.
15741789 - Use and persistence of pharmacotherapy for elementary school students with attention-de...
16873209 - Do geriatricians stay in geriatrics?.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Comment; Comparative Study; Journal Article; Review    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Perspectives in biology and medicine     Volume:  46     ISSN:  0031-5982     ISO Abbreviation:  Perspect. Biol. Med.     Publication Date:  2003  
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2003-10-17     Completed Date:  2004-01-05     Revised Date:  2006-11-15    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  0401132     Medline TA:  Perspect Biol Med     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  S129-37     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics, University of Chicago, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637, USA. msiegler@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Biomedical Research / economics*
Cardiovascular Diseases / mortality,  therapy
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 / mortality,  therapy
Female
Health Care Costs*
Humans
Longevity*
Male
Mortality / trends
Quality of Life*
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
United States
Comments/Corrections
Comment On:
Perspect Biol Med. 2003 Summer;46(3 Suppl):S108-28   [PMID:  14563078 ]

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Diminishing returns? The costs and benefits of improving health.
Next Document:  Let the shoemaker stick to his last: a defense of the "old" public health.