At what point does more not equal better? This is a question many economists str

By
Responsive Centered Red Button

Need Help with this Question or something similar to this? We got you! Just fill out the order form (follow the link below), and your paper will be assigned to an expert to help you ASAP.

Order Form

At what point does more not equal better? This is a question many economists struggle with, but when the consumable good is years of life, everyone turns into an amateur economist. Refer to Figure 1 in The Pragmatist’s Guide to Comparative Effectiveness Research PDF article and discuss your response to this question. In your response, consider the following questions:
Which point on the curve do you advocate for and why?
What are the differences of the various points on the curve?
In your response posts, be sure to use both cost (factor inputs) and survival (quality life years) to support or refute your peers’ initial posts. (replies do not have to be long at all)
Student 1: *ST*
As a nurse we advocate for better care for patients at affordable prices. This is not always possible. Comparative effectiveness research looks at how to offer the best health outcomes for patients, but there are times when this may come at an increased price. What must be considered is if the tradeoff of the benefit is worth the cost. For example, to implant a cardioverter-defibrillator could cost approximately $37,000 but is this cheaper than continued intervention over the life of a patient which depending on which treatment options are chosen could actually come out costing more. Quality-adjusted life year or QALY, looks at an individual’s ability to function along the five dimensions of mobility, pain/discomfort, self-care, anxiety/depression, and carrying out normal day-to-day activities. When treatments are comparatively effective but cost more than $100,000 per additional QALY in the United States, they are generally viewed as not being cost effective, even if Medicare or private insurance companies continue to pay the bills (Cutler, 2004).
If I were going to advocate for a point on the curve it would be for C.
Reference
Social Value UK. 9 June 2016. www.socialvalueuk.org
Chandra, A., Jena, A., & Skinner, J. (2011). The Pragmatist’s Guide to Comparative Effectiveness Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w16990
Student 2: *TR*
The promise of comparative effectiveness studies. I would advocate for them because they change the way how major surgeries were preformed, they can make them less invasive. The promise of comparative effective studies could save three billion dollars if this research can save three billion dollars, I am for it because those funds could be split with different communities that needs more funding. I also like the Primer on effectiveness research because this research looks at five different aspects of leading a normal life and minimizing the death rate. The primer studies also look at a person mental health and with everything going on today this study could be very helpful. The difference between the studies is that comparative health saves money when it comes to healthcare and primer looks at different aspects of person life. Primer also looks at ways to add years to people lives.

How to create Testimonial Carousel using Bootstrap5

Clients' Reviews about Our Services