1996•BMJOpen access

Marginal costs and benefits

David John Torgerson, Anne E. Spencer

Open full text 49 citations

Abstract

Decision makers are interested in measuring the costs and benefits of various interventions, and sometimes they are presented with the average costs and benefits of alternative interventions and asked to compare these. Usually a newer intervention is being compared with an existing one, and the most appropriate comparison is not of average costs (and benefits) but of the extra--or marginal--costs (and benefits) of the new intervention. Reanalysis of the cost effectiveness ratio of biochemical screening of all women for Down's syndrome compared with age based screening shows that the marginal cost effectiveness of biochemical screening is 47,786 pounds, compared with an average cost effectiveness of 37,591 pounds. It may sometimes be difficult or costly to calculate marginal costs and benefits, but this should be done whenever possible.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Decision makers are interested in measuring the costs and benefits of various interventions, and sometimes they are presented with the average costs and benefits of alternative interventions and asked to compare these. Usually a newer intervention is being compared with an existing one, and the most appropriate comparison is not of average costs (and benefits) but of the extra--or marginal--costs (and benefits) of the new intervention. Reanalysis of the cost effectiveness ratio of biochemical screening of all women for Down's syndrome compared with age based screening shows that the marginal cost effectiveness of biochemical screening is 47,786 pounds, compared with an average cost effectiveness of 37,591 pounds. It may sometimes be difficult or costly to calculate marginal costs and benefits, but this should be done whenever possible.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 49 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Decision makers are interested in measuring the costs and benefits of various interventions, and sometimes they are presented with the average costs and benefits of alternative interventions and asked to compare these. Usually a newer intervention is being compared with an existing one, and the most appropriate comparison is not of average costs (and benefits) but of the extra--or marginal--costs (and benefits) of the new intervention. Reanalysis of the cost effectiveness ratio of biochemical screening of all women for Down's syndrome compared with age based screening shows that the marginal cost effectiveness of biochemical screening is 47,786 pounds, compared with an average cost effectiveness of 37,591 pounds. It may sometimes be difficult or costly to calculate marginal costs and benefits, but this should be done whenever possible.

Key concepts: Marginal cost, Cost–benefit analysis, Psychological intervention, Cost benefit, Marginal utility, Cost effectiveness, Intervention (counseling), Health benefits

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Marginal costs and benefits — Research Paper | ScholarLens