Cost-value-ratio

Nicotine biosynthesis is localized in the roots of Nicotiana plants, and the alkaloids are transported to the shoots in the xylem stream,70 mainly to young leaves and stems and the reproductive parts of the plant.72 At first glance, the costly transport mechanisms seem to be a disadvantage, as there is a time lag of 10 hr from time of induction until the increase of nicotine production.73 The roots, however, as the site of synthesis are well protected against herbivory and continue the production, even when up to 88% of the total leave area is removed.74 Optimization of the cost-value ratio seems to be the reason for the inducible defense acting as a cost-saving... 

Product cost/value ratio Primary oil Finished product... 

With the component procurement, however, the actual ordering process is not completed. Similar to the operator who seconds an engineer for the monitoring of the project development, the plant manufacturer will control the activities of his or her subcontractors. The main motive for this so-called expediting is the avoidance of delays in delivery. The consequences of a subcontractor s delay in delivery will be excessively high costs. The intensity of these expediting efforts depends on the company s philosophy or the cost-value-ratio. 

The most difficult feature of this method is that for each type of plant or plant product as well as for each type of equipment there is a break-point where the 0.6 no longer correlates the change in capacity. For small equipment or plants in reasonable pilot or semi-works size, the slope of the cost curve increases and the cost ratio is greater than 0.6, sometimes 0.75, 0.8 or 0.9. From several cost values for respective capacities a log-log plot of capacity versus cost will indicate the proper exponent by the slope of the resultant curve. Extrapolation beyond eight or ten fold is usually not too accurate. 

Cost-utility analysis is similar to cost-efFectiveness analysis in approach, but uses utility as the outcome measure. The utility value is a measure that combines preferences for and values of the overall effect of an intervention on survival, physical and mental health, and social function. Utility is combined with estimates of length of life to provide an assessment of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). As in cost-efFectiveness analysis, incremental cost-utility ratios are calculated to estimate the cost of producing one extra QALY. 

Once values have been assigned for the costs and benefits of each proposed risk-reduction modification, a variety of economic evaluation techniques may be used to choose the most attractive option. These techniques include net present value, discounted cash flow rate of return and cost-benefit ratio analyses. Most companies have a preferred method for evaluating project economics, which can be used with little or no modification. Chapter 8 of... 

Cost-effectiveness is an economic evaluation in which both the costs and the consequences of treatments are examined. The denominator of the cost-effectiveness ratio can be an intermediate outcome, such as a delay in the progression of a disease, or a final outcome, such as life-years saved. Once the outcome is measured, the costs associated with attaining this outcome form the numerator of the ratio. For example, suppose our interest is determining the relative value of drug therapy for epilepsy versus epilepsy... 

Establishing the value of a new pharmaceutical can be done through a cost-effectiveness ratio, where the costs are compared with currently accepted therapy and the effect is expressed in natural units such as life-years gained or disability-free days. A cost-utility analysis uses QALYs as the expression of the drug s effect, which is a measure that incorporates all the outcomes as well as all the costs of the drug treatment. Such a broad-based measure captures how much improved the patient s life becomes as a result of the treatment and at what cost. Quality-adjusted life-years can be viewed as life-years gained,... 

The use of decision analysis can assist in conducting various economic evaluations, including CEA. Although not necessary for all pharmacoeconomic evaluations, decision analysis and decision trees may provide a solid backbone or platform for the decision at hand. Using a decision tree, treatment alternatives, outcomes, and probabilities may be presented graphically and may be reduced algebraically to a single value for comparison (i.e., cost-effectiveness ratio). 

This concept appears to make it useful to calculate a cost-effectiveness ratio, R = Ac/AE, in a comparative study, since a purchaser may then compare R to the slope R of his trade-off line to see whether it is preferred. The value of R, however, will not be measured with perfect precision and the question then arises as to how the uncertainty attendant on its estimation should be expressed. 

One important technical evaluation criterion for electrolytic processes is the efficiency, i.e. the cost-benefit ratio for an industrial electrolysis system. When determining the efficiency, it is expedient to utilize the heating value (3.54 kWh Nm ) or the thermoneutral voltage Vth = 1.48 V because in commercial electrolysis systems for alkaline and PEM electrolysis, water is added in its liquid state. As such, the efficiency referring to the heating value of hydrogen specifies how efficiently the electrolyzer or the entire electrolysis system with all auxiliary components can be operated. 

In order to compare the cost-effectiveness of the two measures, the cost-effectiveness ratio for both measures is calculated. The cost-effectiveness ratio for safety measures 1 and 2 is equal to C /Z and C2/Z2, respectively. Safety measure 1 is more cost-effective than safety measure 2 if Ci/Z < C2IZ2. To see whether safety measure 1 is preferred to status quo or not, the cost-effectiveness ratio has to be compared with a reference value, R. The reference value clarifies how much money the decision-maker is willing to pay to obtain one unit of effectiveness. Implementation of the safety measure is preferred to status quo if the decision-maker is willing to pay more to obtain one unit of effectiveness than the cost-effectiveness index expresses, which means that safety measure 1 is preferred to status quo if / > (C,/Z,). 

The key questions by the assessor are about an added benefit and about the medical value. In the Netherlands, the medical value is assessed unofficially by means of the Dunnings Funnel, which evaluates the candidates by defined criteria, e.g. necessity, effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness commonly calculated as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and social arguments such as budget impact or own responsibility [42]. The societies willingness to pay for an additional quality-adjusted life year gained (QALY) is as follows [43 5] ... 

---