Kemper, 2020 Economic Evaluation Problem An article in JAMA by Mandelblatt et al (2002) compared the societal costs and benefits of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, Pap testing, and their combination to screen for cervical cancer. The paper studied 18 different population screening strategies – Pap testing alone, HPV testing alone, and Pap plus HPV testing – every 2 or 3 years for women beginning at age 20 and continuing to 65 years, 75 years, and death. The following table summarizes some of the results (low cost to high cost). Costs include screening and treatment costs, discounted over the individual’s expected lifetime. Strategy Cost ($) QALYs Saved Incremental Cost Incremental QALY ICER* 0.

No screening 5,.. Pap every 3 years to age ,.. HPV every 3 years to age ,.. Pap every 2 years to age ,.. Pap + HPV every 3 years to age ,..

HPV every 2 years to age ,.. Pap + HPV every 2 years to age ,.05 *If dominated, just put dominated (Hint: if a strategy is dominated, then you must go back to the previous one when calculating the next ICER) Questions 1. Complete the chart above. (Hint: ICER = C/E and for this example, QALY is E) 2. After all of your calculations, suppose that a local health district asked your opinion and analyzed the best strategy. Write one to two paragraphs on which approach you recommend and why you choose it.

THIS CAN BE SUBJECTIVE BUT ONLY IF IT IS BACKED BY ANALYSIS. Works Cited: Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Womack SM, et al. Benefits and Costs of Using HPV Testing to Screen for Cervical Cancer. JAMA. 2002;287(18):2372–2381.

Paper for above instructions

Economic Evaluation of Cervical Cancer Screening Strategies

Introduction

Cervical cancer remains a significant public health concern, and the proper implementation of screening strategies can greatly impact its incidence and mortality rates. With advancements in medical technology, strategies such as Pap testing and HPV testing, alone or in combination, have become commonplace for screening. A pivotal economic evaluation by Mandelblatt et al. (2002) analyzed the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) saved for different cervical cancer screening strategies. In this paper, I will conduct the necessary calculations to fill in the missing data, analyze the results, and recommend an optimal screening strategy.

Cost and QALY Analysis

To complete the analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) needs to be calculated, which is defined as the change in costs divided by the change in QALYs when comparing two screening strategies. The ICER is an essential metric that informs healthcare decision-makers about the cost-effectiveness of various interventions.
1. Completion Chart (Hypothetical Data Representation)
| Strategy | Cost ($) | QALYs Saved | Incremental Cost | Incremental QALY | ICER ($/QALY) |
|--------------------------------------|-----------|-------------|------------------|------------------|----------------------|
| No screening | ,000 | 10 | - | - | - |
| Pap every 3 years to age 65 | ,000 | 12 | ,000 | 2 |

Kemper 2020economic Evaluation Probleman Article In Jama By Mandelbla

Kemper, 2020 Economic Evaluation Problem An article in JAMA by Mandelblatt et al (2002) compared the societal costs and benefits of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, Pap testing, and their combination to screen for cervical cancer. The paper studied 18 different population screening strategies – Pap testing alone, HPV testing alone, and Pap plus HPV testing – every 2 or 3 years for women beginning at age 20 and continuing to 65 years, 75 years, and death. The following table summarizes some of the results (low cost to high cost). Costs include screening and treatment costs, discounted over the individual’s expected lifetime. Strategy Cost ($) QALYs Saved Incremental Cost Incremental QALY ICER* 0.

No screening 5,.. Pap every 3 years to age ,.. HPV every 3 years to age ,.. Pap every 2 years to age ,.. Pap + HPV every 3 years to age ,..

HPV every 2 years to age ,.. Pap + HPV every 2 years to age ,.05 *If dominated, just put dominated (Hint: if a strategy is dominated, then you must go back to the previous one when calculating the next ICER) Questions 1. Complete the chart above. (Hint: ICER = C/E and for this example, QALY is E) 2. After all of your calculations, suppose that a local health district asked your opinion and analyzed the best strategy. Write one to two paragraphs on which approach you recommend and why you choose it.

THIS CAN BE SUBJECTIVE BUT ONLY IF IT IS BACKED BY ANALYSIS. Works Cited: Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Womack SM, et al. Benefits and Costs of Using HPV Testing to Screen for Cervical Cancer. JAMA. 2002;287(18):2372–2381.

,500 |
| HPV every 3 years to age 65 | ,000 | 13 |

Kemper 2020economic Evaluation Probleman Article In Jama By Mandelbla

Kemper, 2020 Economic Evaluation Problem An article in JAMA by Mandelblatt et al (2002) compared the societal costs and benefits of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, Pap testing, and their combination to screen for cervical cancer. The paper studied 18 different population screening strategies – Pap testing alone, HPV testing alone, and Pap plus HPV testing – every 2 or 3 years for women beginning at age 20 and continuing to 65 years, 75 years, and death. The following table summarizes some of the results (low cost to high cost). Costs include screening and treatment costs, discounted over the individual’s expected lifetime. Strategy Cost ($) QALYs Saved Incremental Cost Incremental QALY ICER* 0.

No screening 5,.. Pap every 3 years to age ,.. HPV every 3 years to age ,.. Pap every 2 years to age ,.. Pap + HPV every 3 years to age ,..

HPV every 2 years to age ,.. Pap + HPV every 2 years to age ,.05 *If dominated, just put dominated (Hint: if a strategy is dominated, then you must go back to the previous one when calculating the next ICER) Questions 1. Complete the chart above. (Hint: ICER = C/E and for this example, QALY is E) 2. After all of your calculations, suppose that a local health district asked your opinion and analyzed the best strategy. Write one to two paragraphs on which approach you recommend and why you choose it.

THIS CAN BE SUBJECTIVE BUT ONLY IF IT IS BACKED BY ANALYSIS. Works Cited: Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Womack SM, et al. Benefits and Costs of Using HPV Testing to Screen for Cervical Cancer. JAMA. 2002;287(18):2372–2381.

,000 | 1 |

Kemper 2020economic Evaluation Probleman Article In Jama By Mandelbla

Kemper, 2020 Economic Evaluation Problem An article in JAMA by Mandelblatt et al (2002) compared the societal costs and benefits of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, Pap testing, and their combination to screen for cervical cancer. The paper studied 18 different population screening strategies – Pap testing alone, HPV testing alone, and Pap plus HPV testing – every 2 or 3 years for women beginning at age 20 and continuing to 65 years, 75 years, and death. The following table summarizes some of the results (low cost to high cost). Costs include screening and treatment costs, discounted over the individual’s expected lifetime. Strategy Cost ($) QALYs Saved Incremental Cost Incremental QALY ICER* 0.

No screening 5,.. Pap every 3 years to age ,.. HPV every 3 years to age ,.. Pap every 2 years to age ,.. Pap + HPV every 3 years to age ,..

HPV every 2 years to age ,.. Pap + HPV every 2 years to age ,.05 *If dominated, just put dominated (Hint: if a strategy is dominated, then you must go back to the previous one when calculating the next ICER) Questions 1. Complete the chart above. (Hint: ICER = C/E and for this example, QALY is E) 2. After all of your calculations, suppose that a local health district asked your opinion and analyzed the best strategy. Write one to two paragraphs on which approach you recommend and why you choose it.

THIS CAN BE SUBJECTIVE BUT ONLY IF IT IS BACKED BY ANALYSIS. Works Cited: Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Womack SM, et al. Benefits and Costs of Using HPV Testing to Screen for Cervical Cancer. JAMA. 2002;287(18):2372–2381.

,000 |
| Pap every 2 years to age 65 | ,000 | 14 |