<p>The cost-effectiveness frontier (solid line) includes strategies that maybe cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is less than the accepted threshold. Strategies that are not on the frontier are dominated, meaning that they are not efficient use of resources. In figure 3.A, irrespective of the feeding patterns, remedial cohort is less cost-effective. In figure 3.B, mothers' prompt treatment and replacement feeding cohort is the most cost-effective intervention, followed by the promptly treated cohort being assigned to breastfeeding.</p
<p>The frontier is read from <i>left to right</i>, with interventions connected if they fall on the ...
<p>Strategies standing on the curve are dominant strategies, indicating that they cost less and had ...
<p>Cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF) indicating the probability of the optimal test-t...
<p>The strategies included in quadrant I were more effective and more costly than “<i>Screening stra...
<p>Addition of the interventions that are not visible on the graph, is not optimal until much higher...
<p>Cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF) indicating the probability of the optimal test-t...
<p>The solid lines are cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) representing the probability ...
There is limited evidence that SUPPLY and DEMAND side strategies to help improve the health of mothe...
<p>Fig 4 contains two categories of reported results. The first is the cost-effectiveness acceptabil...
Cost-effectiveness of intervention strategies for AMD screening (A) all strategies (top) and (B) exc...
<p>(A) without the SPAP; (B) with the SPAP. The x-axis indicates the discounted lifetime quality-adj...
<p>(A) The graph plots the incremental discounted QALYs (<i>y</i>-axis) and incremental discounted l...
In many health decision making situations there is a requirement that the effectiveness of intervent...
<p>Superior regimens are lower in cost (toward the left) and greater in efficacy (toward the top). I...
<p>The investment costs in millions in US$ (2007) are depicted on the ho...
<p>The frontier is read from <i>left to right</i>, with interventions connected if they fall on the ...
<p>Strategies standing on the curve are dominant strategies, indicating that they cost less and had ...
<p>Cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF) indicating the probability of the optimal test-t...
<p>The strategies included in quadrant I were more effective and more costly than “<i>Screening stra...
<p>Addition of the interventions that are not visible on the graph, is not optimal until much higher...
<p>Cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF) indicating the probability of the optimal test-t...
<p>The solid lines are cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) representing the probability ...
There is limited evidence that SUPPLY and DEMAND side strategies to help improve the health of mothe...
<p>Fig 4 contains two categories of reported results. The first is the cost-effectiveness acceptabil...
Cost-effectiveness of intervention strategies for AMD screening (A) all strategies (top) and (B) exc...
<p>(A) without the SPAP; (B) with the SPAP. The x-axis indicates the discounted lifetime quality-adj...
<p>(A) The graph plots the incremental discounted QALYs (<i>y</i>-axis) and incremental discounted l...
In many health decision making situations there is a requirement that the effectiveness of intervent...
<p>Superior regimens are lower in cost (toward the left) and greater in efficacy (toward the top). I...
<p>The investment costs in millions in US$ (2007) are depicted on the ho...
<p>The frontier is read from <i>left to right</i>, with interventions connected if they fall on the ...
<p>Strategies standing on the curve are dominant strategies, indicating that they cost less and had ...
<p>Cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF) indicating the probability of the optimal test-t...