In this assessment you will describe and reflect on components of an economic evaluation in a published study. The assignment is comprised of short answer questions (below). Your report should present a response to each question. The purpose of this assessment is to demonstrate your understanding of the key health economics concepts from the economics portion of this course, by applying them to the interpretation and critique of a provided published evaluation.

You are not required to plan or conduct an economic evaluation. The task will involve identifying the key parameters of a health economic evaluation (such as perspective, time horizon, costs and resources), but will not involve a quantification of the costs or resources.

This assessment relates directly to most of the course material from Module 2 and Module 3. Working through these modules will help you complete this assessment. The lecture on Social Return on Investment may also be helpful to review (especially for the final questions as you consider limitations and extensions), but the set article is not itself about SROl analysis methods.

Directions

1. Read the Assessment 2 instructions, template, and rubric in full, to become familiar with the requirements of the assessment. You can find the rubric at the bottom of this page.

2. Make sure that you have progressed through the course materials to date. Learnings from both Module 2 and Module 3 will be relevant to this assessment.

3. Read the provided cost-effectiveness analysis paper by Engel et al

(2023). You can access it at the link below, and anytime via Course Readings.

Engel, L, Alvarez-Jimenez, M, Cagliarini, D, D'Alfonso, S, Faller, L.

Valentine, L,... Mihalopoulos, C 2024, 'The Cost-Effectiveness of a Novel Online Social Therapy to Maintain Treatment Effects From First-Episode Psychosis Services: Results From the Horyzons Randomized Controlled Trial, Schizophrenia Bulletin, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 427-436.

Consider the set questions from the assessment template (linked below) as you read the article. It is also important to note that this is a published article covering a specialist topic, using technical and specialised terms. You are not expected to be experts in the particular health issues, in the intervention, or in the finer details of research study design or statistical analysis. It may be advantageous to read a little about the condition to have some background understanding of the condition when thinking about the appropriateness of the economic approach. However, your focus should be on trying to understand the basic motivations, components, and findings of the economic analysis of the intervention, so try to critically read at that level. You may also find it helpful to review the set assessment questions in the template, and then quickly/lightly 'skim' the paper, to get a sense of the general structure and where the important information might be for you to focus on, before you try to read in more depth.

4  Download the assessment template. Update the template with your name, student a-number, and the year. Re-save the file in doc, docx, or pdf format, with the file name convention: "PHEE Assessment 2 Economic Evaluation Review First Name Last Name a#######", using your own name and student a-number.

PHEE Assessment 2 TEMPLATE *

1.   Answer each of the set short answer questions in the template document, keeping your total responses at the 2,000 word limit(+/- 10%).Your responses should clearly describe the important elements of the published analysis, but also critique it, reflecting and extending on it where directed. Support your critique and reflections using the information delivered throughout Module 2 and Module 3.
Some questions will have clear correct and incorrect answers.
Many questions require judgement, and the majority of the marks that will be awarded are for the justifications that are provided.
Justifications should be logical and supported by learnings from
PHEE or from the readings that have been recommended each week. Note that there are supplementary files to the article that are not required but may be useful for a more comprehensive consideration of the study (you can find them by opening the online version of the published journal article, and navigating to the final section, titled 'Supplementary data', where an additional file is accessible).

1. Reference your work. Referencing is required for this assessment.
This includes correctly referencing the set Engel et al. (2024) article that you are reviewing itself. You are not expected to undertake substantial further research to complete this assessment, but if you have used resources or references from parts of the course or course readings, or done some further reading, you are expected to reference any sources used to substantiate your claims in correct, consistent Harvard referencing style, both where you have used them in-text, and in a full separate Reference List at the end of the document (after a page break). Alternatively, you may use Vancouver referencing style if you wish (whatever referencing standard you choose, it must be consistent throughout your report).

1. Return to the rubric at the bottom of this page, and use it to guide your final edits and checks of your document.

1. Submit your review as a document (doc/docx/pdf type) via the assessment portal.