The Intersection of Health Economics, AI and Health Outcomes
By Sumona Bose
February 1, 2024
Introduction
In recent years, the healthcare industry has witnessed a surge in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies to improve patient care and outcomes. As the field of health economics and outcomes research (HEOR) continues to evolve, it is crucial to understand the economic evaluations of AI-based health interventions. A recent study conducted by Voets et al. provides valuable insights into the current landscape of AI in healthcare. This article aims to summarize the key findings of the study and shed light on the merged perspectives of HEOR, AI, and health outcomes. The application of Health Economics in AI allows us to analyse a balanced view of how intrinsic digital innovation is in the healthcare landscape. This article authored by Vithlani et al., builds on the progressive work of Voets et al.
Relevance of Economic Evaluations
Economic evaluations play a crucial role in assessing the value of AI-based health interventions. The original review by Voets et al. found that cost minimization was the prevailing type of health economic evaluation (HEE). However, the updated review reveals a shift towards cost-utility analysis (CUA) as the most common study type. This change suggests a growing emphasis on assessing the broader economic and health outcomes of AI interventions. The application of Health Economics into AI brings about numerous debates on how evaluative methodologies are efficient.
Model-Based Evaluations
The updated review also highlights a significant difference in the use of model-based evaluations compared to the original review. The study found that 45% of the HEEs were model-based, the updated review indicates that the large majority of HEEs now employ this approach. Model-based evaluations allow for estimating future costs and benefits of AI technologies.
Figure 1: Summary of economic evaluation parameters and outcomes.
Limitations and Reporting Standards
Despite the increase in the use of sophisticated economic evaluation techniques, the evidence supporting these methods remains limited. The quality assessment conducted in the study revealed potentially serious limitations in the sources and assumptions regarding input data. The reporting of HEEs also lacked clarity, making it challenging to determine fundamental aspects such as cost application, integration with clinical care, and anticipated users of AI interventions.
Conclusion
The intersection of health economics, AI, and health outcomes is a rapidly evolving field with significant implications for the healthcare industry. The study conducted by Voets et al. provides valuable insights into the current landscape of AI in healthcare. It highlights the need for economic evaluations of AI-based health interventions. It found that AI health technologies are on the rise, with automated image analysis being the most commonly evaluated purpose of AI interventions. The shift towards cost-utility analysis suggests a growing emphasis on assessing the broader economic and health outcomes of AI interventions.
💊 The jury is out on the pricing for Journavx®
Delve into our review of the recent ICER 2025 report on suzetrigine (Journavx®) to learn about the anticipated value relative to its clinical efficacy, safety profile and potential cost savings in tackling acute pain while addressing the opioid crisis.
Explore how suzetrigine paves the way for a safer, more effective approach to pain management and its implications on healthcare economics.
🚨 What happens when scientific research funding is threatened?
In his thought-provoking article, Atul Gawande highlights the dire implications of proposed federal funding cuts to elite institutions like Harvard. He argues that such actions could devastate not just innovation, but also patient care and public health across the nation.
Explore the complexities of research funding and the potential ripple effects on America’s scientific landscape. Don’t miss out on these critical insights!
🚀 Are we witnessing a new era in bladder cancer treatment?
The FDA’s recent approval of durvalumab as the first perioperative immunotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) could revolutionize outcomes for patients facing this formidable diagnosis. With significant improvements in event-free survival and overall survival over standard chemotherapy, this groundbreaking treatment offers new hope 🎉.
Curious about how this could shape the future of cancer care? Dive into the full article to uncover the potential impacts on clinical practice and health economics.
#SyenzaNews #oncology #HealthEconomics
When you partner with Syenza, it’s like a Nuclear Fusion.
Our expertise are combined with yours, and we contribute clinical expertise and advanced degrees in
health policy, health economics, systems analysis, public finance, business, and project management.
You’ll also feel our high-impact global and local perspectives with cultural intelligence.
