Towards meaningful outcome measures for health economic evaluations in skin cancer
- 1Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Ghent
- 2Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Interuniversity Centre for Health Economics Research (I-CHER), Ghent University
Abstract
Healthcare systems are facing increasing resource constraints, so robust health economic evaluations (HEE) are essential to inform evidence-based decision-making, also in skin cancer care. Selecting incomplete or inappropriate outcomes in HEE may under- or overestimate benefits for patients, misrepresent trade-offs between costs and outcomes and lead to suboptimal resource allocation. This comment discusses key considerations in selecting outcome measures for skin cancer HEE and proposes a conceptual decision matrix to guide meaningful outcome selection. Informed by methodological guidance and a targeted literature search, outcome domains applied in skin cancer HEE were categorized into quality of life based outcomes and clinical outcomes (hard and intermediate endpoints). These were assessed against predefined criteria covering measurement properties (e.g. sensitivity & validity), model integration (e.g. economic translatability & compatibility), decision relevance (e.g. interpretability for health technology assessment (HTA) & patient burden) and feasibility (e.g. data availability & generalizability). A qualitative scoring approach was used to make trade-offs between outcomes explicit. Generic quality of life outcomes facilitate comparability and interpretability for HTA but may lack sensitivity. Disease-specific outcomes better reflect patient-relevant domains but raise challenges regarding comparability. Intermediate clinical outcomes align closely with intervention mechanisms but require additional assumptions. The decision matrix highlights that no single outcome measure performs well across all criteria. Overall, the findings support selecting complementary outcome measures that reflect the intervention mechanisms, patient- preferences and burden and decision context. The proposed decision matrix provides a structured framework to support transparent and meaningful outcome selection.
Related
- PHOENIX: a study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial of pre-emptive pharmacogenomic panel testing in acute care settings with health economic evaluations
- Targeting health-related quality of life issues not found with functional outcome measures a year after aneurysm subarachnoid hemorrhage in a Swedish national cohort.
- Early mobility to improVE health outcomes following cardiac surgery (EVE) clinical trial development: findings from workshop 2-co-created definition and prioritized barriers, facilitators and outcome and experience measures.
- The economic burden of Borderline Personality Disorder: direct and indirect costs, and evidence from evaluations of interventions
- Cost-Effectiveness of Angle-Based Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery (MIGS): A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations.
BibTeX
@article{meertens2026towards,
title = {{Towards meaningful outcome measures for health economic evaluations in skin cancer}},
author = {Annick Meertens and Lieven Annemans and Floor Verstraete and Isabelle Hoorens and Nick Verhaeghe},
journal = {Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1186/s12962-026-00855-5},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-026-00855-5},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Towards meaningful outcome measures for health economic evaluations in skin cancer
AU - Annick Meertens
AU - Lieven Annemans
AU - Floor Verstraete
AU - Isabelle Hoorens
AU - Nick Verhaeghe
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/25
JO - Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
DO - 10.1186/s12962-026-00855-5
UR - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-026-00855-5
AB - Healthcare systems are facing increasing resource constraints, so robust health economic evaluations (HEE) are essential to inform evidence-based decision-making, also in skin cancer care. Selecting incomplete or inappropriate outcomes in HEE may under- or overestimate benefits for patients, misrepresent trade-offs between costs and outcomes and lead to suboptimal resource allocation. This comment discusses key considerations in selecting outcome measures for skin cancer HEE and proposes a conceptual decision matrix to guide meaningful outcome selection. Informed by methodological guidance and a targeted literature search, outcome domains applied in skin cancer HEE were categorized into quality of life based outcomes and clinical outcomes (hard and intermediate endpoints). These were assessed against predefined criteria covering measurement properties (e.g. sensitivity & validity), model integration (e.g. economic translatability & compatibility), decision relevance (e.g. interpretability for health technology assessment (HTA) & patient burden) and feasibility (e.g. data availability & generalizability). A qualitative scoring approach was used to make trade-offs between outcomes explicit. Generic quality of life outcomes facilitate comparability and interpretability for HTA but may lack sensitivity. Disease-specific outcomes better reflect patient-relevant domains but raise challenges regarding comparability. Intermediate clinical outcomes align closely with intervention mechanisms but require additional assumptions. The decision matrix highlights that no single outcome measure performs well across all criteria. Overall, the findings support selecting complementary outcome measures that reflect the intervention mechanisms, patient- preferences and burden and decision context. The proposed decision matrix provides a structured framework to support transparent and meaningful outcome selection.
SN - 1478-7547
ER -