Rob Carter

Prof. Rob Carter

Melbourne Disability Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
+1

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

22Years (2005-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 December 2008 in Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RCRob Carter
Rob Carter
TVTheo Vos
Theo Vos
MMMarj Moodie
Marj Moodie
MHMichelle Haby
Michelle Haby
AMAnne Magnus
Anne Magnus
CMCathrine Mihalopoulos
Cathrine Mihalopoulos
This article reports on the 'Assessing Cost-Effectiveness' (ACE) initiative in priority setting from Australia. It commences with why priority setting is topical and notes that a wide variety of approaches are available. In assessing these various approaches, it is argued that a useful first step is to consider what constitutes an 'ideal' approach to priority setting. A checklist to guide priority setting is presented based on guidance from economic theory, ethics and social justice, lessons from empirical experience and the needs of decision-makers. The checklist is seen as an important contribution because it is the first time that criteria from such a broad range of considerations have been brought together to develop a framework for priority setting that endeavors to be both realistic and theoretically sound. The checklist will then be applied to a selection of existing approaches in order to illustrate their deficiencies and to provide the platform for explaining the unique features of the ACE approach. A case study (ACE-Cancer) will then be presented and assessed against the checklist, including reaction from stakeholders in the cancer field. The article concludes with an overview of the full body of ACE research completed to date, together with some reflections on the ACE experience.

SASteven Allender
Steven Allender
LMLynne Millar
Lynne Millar
PHPeter S. Hovmand
Peter S. Hovmand
CBColin Bell
Colin Bell
MMMarj Moodie
Marj Moodie
SMSue Morgan
Sue Morgan
Background: Community-based initiatives show promise for preventing childhood obesity. They are characterized by community leaders and members working together to address complex local drivers of energy balance. Objectives: To present a protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial in ten communities in the Great South Coast Region of Victoria, Australia to test whether it is possible to: (1) strengthen community action for childhood obesity prevention, and (2) measure the impact of increased action on risk factors for childhood obesity. Methods: The WHO STOPS intervention involves a facilitated community engagement process that: creates an agreed systems map of childhood obesity causes for a community; identifies intervention opportunities through leveraging the dynamic aspects of the system; and, converts these understandings into community-built, systems-oriented action plans. Ten communities will be randomized (1:1) to intervention or control in year one and all communities will be included by year three. The primary outcome is childhood obesity prevalence among grade two (ages 7–8 y), grade four (9–10 y) and grade six (11–12 y) students measured using our established community-led monitoring system (69% school and 93% student participation rate in government and independent schools). An additional group of 13 external communities from other regions of Victoria with no specific interventions will provide an external comparison. These communities will also allow us to assess diffusion of the intervention to control communities during the first three years of the trial. Conclusion: This trial will test effectiveness, over a five-year period, of community-owned, -supported and -led strategies designed to address complex and dynamic causes of childhood obesity.

18 November 2009 in BMC Public Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RCRob Carter
Rob Carter
MMMarj Moodie
Marj Moodie
AMAlison Markwick
Alison Markwick
AMAnne Magnus
Anne Magnus
TVTheo Vos
Theo Vos
MHMichelle Haby
Michelle Haby
The aim of the ACE-Obesity study was to determine the economic credentials of interventions which aim to prevent unhealthy weight gain in children and adolescents. We have reported elsewhere on the modelled effectiveness of 13 obesity prevention interventions in children. In this paper, we report on the cost results and associated methods together with the innovative approach to priority setting that underpins the ACE-Obesity study. The Assessing Cost Effectiveness (ACE) approach combines technical rigour with 'due process' to facilitate evidence-based policy analysis. Technical rigour was achieved through use of standardised evaluation methods, a research team that assembles best available evidence and extensive uncertainty analysis. Cost estimates were based on pathway analysis, with resource usage estimated for the interventions and their 'current practice' comparator, as well as associated cost offsets. Due process was achieved through involvement of stakeholders, consensus decisions informed by briefing papers and 2nd stage filter analysis that captures broader factors that influence policy judgements in addition to cost-effectiveness results. The 2nd stage filters agreed by stakeholders were 'equity', 'strength of the evidence', 'feasibility of implementation', 'acceptability to stakeholders', 'sustainability' and 'potential for side-effects'. The intervention costs varied considerably, both in absolute terms (from cost saving [6 interventions] to in excess of AUD50m per annum) and when expressed as a 'cost per child' estimate (from <AUD1.0 [reduction of TV advertising of high fat foods/high sugar drinks] to AUD31,553 [laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding for morbidly obese adolescents]). High costs per child reflected cost structure, target population and/or under-utilisation. The use of consistent methods enables valid comparison of potential intervention costs and cost-offsets for each of the interventions. ACE-Obesity informs policy-makers about cost-effectiveness, health impact, affordability and 2nd stage filters for important options for preventing unhealthy weight gain in children. In related articles cost-effectiveness results and second stage filter considerations for each intervention assessed will be presented and analysed.

1 January 2011 in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Dominique CadilhacDominique Cadilhac
Dominique Cadilhac
TCToby B Cumming
Toby B Cumming
LSLauren Sheppard
Lauren Sheppard
DPDora Pearce
Dora Pearce
RCRob Carter
Rob Carter
AMAnne Magnus
Anne Magnus
Physical inactivity has major impacts on health and productivity. Our aim was to estimate the health and economic benefits of reducing the prevalence of physical inactivity in the 2008 Australian adult population. The economic benefits were estimated as 'opportunity cost savings', which represent resources utilized in the treatment of preventable disease that are potentially available for re-direction to another purpose from fewer incident cases of disease occurring in communities.

1 June 2012 in BMC Public Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
LCLinda J Cobiac
Linda J Cobiac
AMAnne Magnus
Anne Magnus
JBJan J Barendregt
Jan J Barendregt
RCRob Carter
Rob Carter
TVTheo Vos
Theo Vos
Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death worldwide. Like many countries, Australia is currently changing its guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention from drug treatment for everyone with ‘high blood pressure’ or ‘high cholesterol’, to prevention based on a patient’s absolute risk. In this research, we model cost-effectiveness of cardiovascular disease prevention with blood pressure and lipid drugs in Australia under three different scenarios: (1) the true current practice in Australia; (2) prevention as intended under the current guidelines; and (3) prevention according to proposed absolute risk levels. We consider the implications of changing to absolute risk-based cardiovascular disease prevention, for the health of the Australian people and for Government health sector expenditure over the long term.

1 January 2010 in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Dominique CadilhacDominique Cadilhac
Dominique Cadilhac
HDHelen M Dewey
Helen M Dewey
TVTheo Vos
Theo Vos
RCRob Carter
Rob Carter
ATAmanda G Thrift
Amanda G Thrift
People suffering different types of stroke have differing demographic characteristics and survival. However, current estimates of disease burden are based on the same underlying assumptions irrespective of stroke type. We hypothesized that average Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) lost from stroke would be different for ischemic stroke and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH).