Cost-minimization analysis (CMA) assumes that outcomes are equivalent.

Cost-minimization analysis (CMA) assumes that outcomes are equivalent.

• A. Outcomes are assumed to be equivalent
• B. Costs are ignored
• C. Time horizon irrelevant
• D. Effectiveness is the primary driver

Answer: (A)

Cost-minimization analysis rests on the idea that the health outcomes produced by the options are the same. When outcomes are assumed equivalent, the only factor that can differentiate choices is cost, so the best option is simply the one with the lowest total cost to achieve that outcome. This is why outcome equivalence is the defining feature of CMA—the effectiveness or clinical impact isn’t driving the decision because it’s treated as the same across options. Costs aren’t ignored in CMA; the point is to minimize them given equal effectiveness. Time horizon isn’t the defining factor either—while costs over the chosen horizon matter, CMA’s core premise is the assumed equality of outcomes, not the horizon itself. And effectiveness isn’t the driver in CMA because, by assumption, there’s no difference to compare.

Cost-minimization analysis rests on the idea that the health outcomes produced by the options are the same. When outcomes are assumed equivalent, the only factor that can differentiate choices is cost, so the best option is simply the one with the lowest total cost to achieve that outcome. This is why outcome equivalence is the defining feature of CMA—the effectiveness or clinical impact isn’t driving the decision because it’s treated as the same across options.

Costs aren’t ignored in CMA; the point is to minimize them given equal effectiveness. Time horizon isn’t the defining factor either—while costs over the chosen horizon matter, CMA’s core premise is the assumed equality of outcomes, not the horizon itself. And effectiveness isn’t the driver in CMA because, by assumption, there’s no difference to compare.