In a new peer-reviewed study just published in Health Affairs, Waymark co-founder and Head of Clinical Sanjay Basu and co-authors at the University of Pennsylvania and University of California San Francisco explore how cost-effective analyses—one of the most commonly used tools to evaluate health interventions—may risk perpetuating health disparities. The study finds that standard approaches to cost-effective analyses tend to undervalue interventions that would primarily benefit disadvantaged groups due to: 

• Marginalized groups facing a higher risk of dying from multiple potential causes that diminish the benefits of treating diseases (known as “competing risks”) 
• Underinsurance or lack of insurance that result in lower baseline healthcare costs 
• Pre-existing wage disparities that may appear to show lower lost work productivity compared to more privileged groups

The authors also outline several approaches to address these issues and ensure our analytical methods lead to better decisions that serve all members of society, especially the chronically underserved. This is critical work that deserves the attention of not just academics and researchers but also policymakers, payers, and providers who care about improving health equity. 

Read the full study here.