Premium
Commentary: Do clinicians need health economics? – a commentary on Beecham (2014)
Author(s) -
Taylor Eric
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
journal of child psychology and psychiatry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.652
H-Index - 211
eISSN - 1469-7610
pISSN - 0021-9630
DOI - 10.1111/jcpp.12264
Subject(s) - equity (law) , mental health , psychology , child health , set (abstract data type) , medline , public relations , medical education , political science , psychiatry , medicine , family medicine , law , computer science , programming language
Translation from scientific knowledge into clinical practice is a complex process. It is not enough to know what is effective: what is affordable and achievable matters too. Setting priorities is a tricky business, and health economics seeks to acquire the scientific knowledge that can guide those who must set them. Health economists, however, have in the past given little attention to the problems of child and adolescent mental health ( CAMH ). Beecham's accompanying Annual Research Review is a very helpful review of the state of the art. Studies are still few, but they are increasing, and her account shows how a useful methodology is developing. It gives a thorough description of economic studies on child mental health disorders; and shows how they can provide information needed for planning what should be provided. The review will be relevant to all practitioners who are interested in funding, equity and allocation – and most will be. As this Commentary argues, Beecham's review is not only for economists and researchers, but also for clinicians who need not only the lessons from the studies reviewed, but more and better research.