Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) raises questions that are too to be left to policy analysts and economists. Those who utilize CEA acknowledge its inherent value system and adapt it to a more ethical. Rather than basing health care policy on medical outcome...human calculations require better "returns" from investment in the health of, or alternatively, require them to be more ill to warrant the same investment as for the health of men. It would be cruel and ironic to medical injustice to economic injustice by incorporating the latter into care decisionmaking. CEA has the potential to be driven by economic and preferentially allocate funds to the "cheap to treat," although inequities may even out over time. While it may be a moral imperative to the greatest good possible, it cannot be done at the expense of the few.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Emery et al. (1989) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: