BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//International Health Economics Association - ECPv6.15.11//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:International Health Economics Association
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://healtheconomics.org
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for International Health Economics Association
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:UTC
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:UTC
DTSTART:20250101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:UTC
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:UTC
DTSTART:20250101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20260409T070000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20260409T080000
DTSTAMP:20260507T051056
CREATED:20260305T182347Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260305T182347Z
UID:334784-1775718000-1775721600@healtheconomics.org
SUMMARY:Showcasing ECR Research in Health Economics: BRCA Screening Webinar
DESCRIPTION:Add to Calendar! \nThis webinar will feature presentations from Dr Xia Wei (Postdoctoral Researcher\, Peking University)and Mackenzie Bourke (PhD Candidate and Research Fellow\, University of Melbourne). They will present their research on the economic evaluation of BRCA screening strategies\, including implications for prevention policy and resource allocation. \nEconomic evaluation of genetic testing and management strategies for breast and ovarian cancer\nThis presentation will present cost-effectiveness evidence on genetic testing and management strategies for breast and ovarian cancer. It will cover economic evaluations of unselected and population-based genetic testing\, and gene-specific prevention options (including cancer screening\, medical prevention\, and risk-reducing surgery) across different risk groups and settings. The analysis considers long-term health outcomes\, costs\, and quality-of-life impacts\, and discusses the implications for management pathways and resource allocation decision-making for breast and ovarian cancer. \nIntegrating individual-level preferences into an economic evaluation of genomic screening\nSuccessful implementation of genomic screening for the management of breast and ovarian cancer depends on uptake of genetic testing\, preventative therapies\, and intensified surveillance programs. Where economic evaluations have incorporated patient preferences\, these have typically been applied inconsistently and primarily at the cohort level. This study integrates discrete choice experiment data within a discrete-event simulation to predict individual-level preferences and estimate their impact on costs and health outcomes. Preliminary results suggest that incorporating individual preferences has only a marginal impact on average cost-effectiveness outcomes\, but a larger effect on subgroup-level cost-effectiveness results\, which may have important distributional implications. \nSpeakers:  \nXia Wei – Postdoctoral fellow\, School of Public Health\, Peking University\nXia Wei is a postdoctoral fellow at the School of Public Health\, Peking University. She received her PhD from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. Her research focuses on health economics\, health technology assessment\, and evidence-based decision-making in cancer prevention and control. She has published more than 26 full-text publications in peer-review journals\, including JAMA Oncology and JAMA Network Open. \n  \n  \n  \n  \nMackenzie Bourke – PhD Candidate\, Economics of Genomics and Precision Medicine Unit\, University of Melbourne\nMac is a PhD candidate and research assistant in the Economics of Genomics and Precision Medicine Unit at the Melbourne School of Population and Global Health\, University of Melbourne. His research focuses on the economic modelling of genomic technologies for cancer and on advancing methodological approaches to better capture the value of genomic medicine in health economic evaluation. His work also examines quality-of-life outcomes among people living with rare conditions and their careers\, with the aim of improving how these impacts are measured and incorporated into economic evaluations and policy decisions relating to genomic and precision medicine.
URL:https://healtheconomics.org/event/showcasing-ecr-research-in-health-economics-brca-screening-webinar/
LOCATION:Zoom
CATEGORIES:IHEA Event
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20260413T153000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20260413T163000
DTSTAMP:20260507T051056
CREATED:20260402T144334Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260402T153005Z
UID:334843-1776094200-1776097800@healtheconomics.org
SUMMARY:Culture and Health
DESCRIPTION:Add to Calendar! \nThis webinar explores the multifaceted relationship between culture and health from an economic perspective\, integrating insights from anthropology\, psychology\, and political science. It begins by examining how culture provides meaning to illness and suffering and explores how culturally grounded “disease theory systems” influence beliefs about what causes illness\, how and whether suffering should be remedied\, and the appropriate role of the state in allocating health care resources. The importance of culture in defining the boundary between normal and abnormal pathology is highlighted via case studies. The chapter next reviews evidence on how health behaviors such as smoking\, firearm ownership\, dietary practices\, and reproductive decisions are influenced by cultural norms of masculinity and religiosity. Lastly\, it examines how firms\, governments\, and civil society leverage and advance cultural narratives to influence individual behavior and public policy. Thus\, culture in relation to health both naturally evolves and is actively constructed\, with implications for health inequality and health policy. \nSpeaker:  \nMarcella Alsan is a physician-economist studying the economics of health inequality domestically and internationally. She is Associate Editor at the Journal of Economic Literature and Co-Chair of the Health Care Delivery Initiative of Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab at MIT. She is co-recipient of the 2019 Arrow Award for Best Paper in Health Economics\, the 2021 William G. Manning Memorial Award for the Best Research in Health Econometrics\, recipient of a MacArthur Fellowship and was elected into the National Academy of Medicine in 2022. She co-directs the Health Inequality Lab at Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
URL:https://healtheconomics.org/event/culture-and-health/
LOCATION:Zoom
CATEGORIES:IHEA Event
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20260428T140000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20260428T150000
DTSTAMP:20260507T051056
CREATED:20260402T152906Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260407T180713Z
UID:334848-1777384800-1777388400@healtheconomics.org
SUMMARY:A new approach to comparing EQ-5D-5L value sets: What really makes a difference to people?
DESCRIPTION:Add to Calendar! \nBackground\nEQ-5D-5L value sets play a vital role worldwide in health technology assessment and measuring population health. However\, it is difficult to compare the impact of using different value sets\, for example if an older value set is replaced by a new one\, or if two or more value sets are available. \nObjectives\n1) Reformulating the standard EQ-5D-5L health-state utility model in terms of meaningful\, interpretable parameters: range of utility from best to worst state\, relative importance of each dimension\, and decrements associated with levels 2-4 as a fraction of the level 5 decrement;\n2) Providing formulae for the marginal effects of the reformulated model’s parameters on utilities;\n3) Empirically estimating marginal effects for several value sets and patient groups. \nData and Methods\nThe 2017/8 Health Surveys for England collected EQ-5D-5L responses from around 13\,000 people. Participants with a long-term condition were divided into patient groups according to how the condition affected them (vision/mobility/mental health/etc.). Participants with long-lasting pain were divided into groups of varying severity using the Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS). The marginal effects of parameters from 48 EQ-5D-5L value sets were calculated for each patient group. In countries with multiple value sets available\, differences in parameters were compared to differences in mean utility. \nResults\nParameters representing value set range had consistently large marginal effects across value sets and patient groups. Increased importance of self-care relative to other dimensions always increased utility\, though with variable effect sizes. The direction and magnitude of the marginal effects of other dimensions’ relative importance varied across value sets and patient groups. The magnitude of all parameters’ marginal effects increased with condition severity.\nIn within-country comparisons the magnitudes of parameter differences were related to utility differences\, with the smallest and largest differences for both seen when comparing the Japanese and Peruvian value sets respectively. Utility differences were increasing in disease severity: the utility of people with the worst chronic pain level differed by 0.425 depending on which Peruvian value set was used. \nConclusion\nThis study presents innovative methods for comparing EQ-5D-5L value sets and assessing what aspects have the biggest impact on patient utilities. Value set range was a major driver of utility differences\, and people with more severe conditions were most likely to be impacted by using alternative value sets. \nSpeaker: \nEd Webb is an associate professor at the Academic Unit of Health Economics\, University of Leeds. He studies preferences and decision-making in a wide variety of contexts and using a range of methods. His other research interests include the measurement and valuation of health\, as well as interactions between health\, work and wellbeing.
URL:https://healtheconomics.org/event/a-new-approach-to-comparing-eq-5d-5l-value-sets-what-really-makes-a-difference-to-people/
LOCATION:Zoom
CATEGORIES:IHEA Event
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR