What is a key question to consider when evaluating economic analyses?

• A. Is the sample size adequate?
• B. Are the methods novel?
• C. Do benefits justify costs?
• D. Is the funding source disclosed?

Answer: (C)

Evaluating economic analyses hinges on value for money: do the health benefits produced by an intervention justify the resources spent to achieve them? In practice, analysts compare incremental costs to incremental benefits to determine if an option provides net value. If the benefits exceed the costs (or the cost per unit of benefit is acceptable according to a threshold), the intervention is considered cost-effective. This focus on whether benefits justify costs is why that option is the best choice. Other points, like sample size, novelty of methods, or disclosure of funding, affect precision, methodological interest, or potential bias, but they don’t address the fundamental question of value for money in the intervention.