Is Positive Return on Investment (ROI) Too Good to Be True? A Review of the Quality of Study Methodology in Behavioral Chronic Disease Interventions Claiming Positive ROI

dc.contributor.advisor

Finkelstein, Eric

dc.contributor.author

Hong, Jiayang

dc.date.accessioned

2018-03-20T17:59:14Z

dc.date.available

2018-03-20T17:59:14Z

dc.date.issued

2017

dc.department

Global Health

dc.description.abstract

Objective: To examine the quality of articles that claim cost savings resulting from chronic disease interventions. The interventions are limited to behavioral interventions, including worksite wellness programs, weight and disease management programs, and community-based programs. Methods: Published articles were identified from a database search. Included articles were published between January 1990 and December 2016, described a positive return on investment of behavioral interventions for chronic disease. A single reviewer, following specific criteria, assessed research quality using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument. Results: Of 1990 retrieved articles, 19 met study inclusion criteria. No study we reviewed has sufficient quality to be considered evidentiary. Conclusions: Economic evaluations yield positive ROI on chronic disease behavioral interventions have limited methodological quality and their results should be interpreted with caution.

dc.identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/16406

dc.subject

Economics

dc.subject

Health care management

dc.title

Is Positive Return on Investment (ROI) Too Good to Be True? A Review of the Quality of Study Methodology in Behavioral Chronic Disease Interventions Claiming Positive ROI

dc.type

Master's thesis

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Hong_duke_0066N_14180.pdf
Size:
790.44 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections