|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$0||Benefits minus costs||$141|
|Participants||$9||Benefit to cost ratio||$5.86|
|Others||$175||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||($14)||benefits greater than the costs||85 %|
|Net program cost||($29)|
|Benefits minus cost||$141|
|Meta-Analysis of Program Effects|
|Outcomes measured||Treatment age||No. of effect sizes||Treatment N||Adjusted effect sizes(ES) and standard errors(SE) used in the benefit - cost analysis||Unadjusted effect size (random effects model)|
|First time ES is estimated||Second time ES is estimated|
Surgical delivery of an infant.
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Affected outcome:||Resulting benefits:1||Benefits accrue to:|
|Cesarean sections||Health care associated with Cesarean sections||$0||$9||$175||$0||$184|
|Program cost||Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$0||($14)||($14)|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$27||2014||Present value of net program costs (in 2018 dollars)||($29)|
|Comparison costs||$0||2014||Cost range (+ or -)||20 %|
Benefits Minus Costs
Benefits by Perspective
Taxpayer Benefits by Source of Value
|Benefits Minus Costs Over Time (Cumulative Discounted Dollars)|
|The graph above illustrates the estimated cumulative net benefits per-participant for the first fifty years beyond the initial investment in the program. We present these cash flows in discounted dollars. If the dollars are negative (bars below $0 line), the cumulative benefits do not outweigh the cost of the program up to that point in time. The program breaks even when the dollars reach $0. At this point, the total benefits to participants, taxpayers, and others, are equal to the cost of the program. If the dollars are above $0, the benefits of the program exceed the initial investment.|
Lomas, J., Enkin, M., Anderson, G.M., Hannah, W.J., Vayda, E., & Singer, J. (1991). Opinion leaders vs audit and feedback to implement practice guidelines. Delivery after previous cesarean section. Jama, 265(17), 2202-7.
Scarella, A., Chamy, V., Sepulveda, M., & Belizan, J.M. (2011). Medical audit using the Ten Group Classification System and its impact on the cesarean section rate. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 154(2), 136-140.
van, D.J., Lim, F., & van, R.E. (2008). Introducing caesarean section audit in a regional teaching hospital in The Netherlands. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 139(2), 151-156.