Skip to main content

Table 3 Awareness of stakeholders about basic health economic principles; level of agreement with statements by stakeholder category (scale responses: 1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree)

From: Similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey

  Decision-maker Purchaser of services/pharma products Professional service provider Evidence generator Advocate of health promotion Total Kruskal–Wallis test
Statements n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD) P value
‘Incremental costs’ means by how much the studied intervention itself costs more or less than the comparator intervention 26 4.50 (1.77) 7 5.43 (1.90) 15 5.60 (1.64) 22 5.95 (1.50) 11 5.00 (1.84) 81 5.25 (1.76) 0.027
When an intervention in itself is cheap, it is always cost-effective compared to another intervention 29 1.76 (1.15) 7 2.29 (2.22) 18 2.89 (2.14) 25 1.32 (0.75) 14 1.64 (1.50) 93 1.88 (1.53) 0.027
‘Willingness to pay’ means how much a society is willing to pay for a quality-adjusted life year 26 4.19 (1.98) 7 3.86 (2.12) 15 4.87 (0.83) 22 4.64 (2.22) 10 4.40 (1.71) 80 4.44 (1.86) 0.73
My intervention can be cost-effective compared to another intervention, even when its societal costs are higher than the regular care 28 4.93 (1.84) 7 5.43 (2.07) 18 5.50 (1.69) 25 5.80 (1.92) 13 5.46 (1.71) 91 5.40 (1.83) 0.24
From a healthcare payer perspective indirect costs in full (such as 7productivity losses) are included 27 3.30 (2.15) 7 3.14 (2.04) 18 2.94 (2.16) 23 2.96 (2.18) 10 2.50 (2.12) 85 3.02 (2.11) 0.76
  1. SD, Standard deviation