Health economic evaluation of health promotion and disease prevention in Germany: a scoping review

Abstract Background Health promotion and disease prevention are receiving increasing attention in Germany because of their potential to improve population health and reduce healthcare costs. Health-economic evaluations (HEEs) are essential for informing evidence-based decision-making in this field. However, HEEs of preventive interventions often face methodological challenges. This scoping review examines the current state and characteristics of HEEs conducted in the context of health promotion and disease prevention in Germany. Methods A scoping review was conducted to map the landscape of HEE of health promotion and disease prevention interventions in Germany, following a priori–registered protocol. Three bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science) were searched from their inception to March 2025. The screening of titles, abstracts, and full texts was performed in a blinded, double-reviewer, and stepwise manner using predefined inclusion criteria: (i) focus on the German population, (ii) application of an HEE as the primary research method, and (iii) evaluation of a health-promoting or disease-preventing intervention. Studies focusing on tertiary prevention were excluded. Results Of the 4,632 records identified, 162 eligible original studies met the inclusion criteria. The volume of published HEEs has increased over time. Most studies (53.7%) assessed primary preventive interventions. Cost-effectiveness analysis was the most frequently applied HEE analysis type. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) are commonly reported as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained (42.4% of all ICERs). In 85.2% of the studies, the intervention was judged to be cost-effective. A model-based approach was used in 75.9% of the studies, and 81.3% of these studies relied partly on non-German data sources. More than half of all studies (56.1%) reported limitations due to a lack of German-specific data. Conclusions HEEs related to health promotion and disease prevention interventions in Germany exhibit substantial methodological heterogeneity. Frequent reliance on non-German data and the large proportion of interventions deemed cost-effective may reflect contextual data gaps and potential publication bias. These issues complicate the interpretation of economic evidence and pose challenges for decision-makers seeking to prioritize preventive strategies. Trial registration https://osf.io/h6749/overview

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Health Economics Review
Published
2026-09-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-026-00859-0
Primary Topic
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Health economic evaluation of health promotion and disease prevention in Germany: a scoping review

Michaela Kirschneck, Rosa M. S. Visscher, Eva Juliane Beer, Michaela Coenen
Health Economics Review
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
article

Health economic evaluation of health promotion and disease prevention in Germany: a scoping review

Michaela Kirschneck, Rosa M. S. Visscher, Eva Juliane Beer, Michaela Coenen
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Health promotion and disease prevention are receiving increasing attention in Germany because of their potential to improve population health and reduce healthcare costs. Health-economic evaluations (HEEs) are essential for informing evidence-based decision-making in this field. However, HEEs of preventive interventions often face methodological challenges. This scoping review examines the current state and characteristics of HEEs conducted in the context of health promotion and disease prevention in Germany. Methods A scoping review was conducted to map the landscape of HEE of health promotion and disease prevention interventions in Germany, following a priori–registered protocol. Three bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science) were searched from their inception to March 2025. The screening of titles, abstracts, and full texts was performed in a blinded, double-reviewer, and stepwise manner using predefined inclusion criteria: (i) focus on the German population, (ii) application of an HEE as the primary research method, and (iii) evaluation of a health-promoting or disease-preventing intervention. Studies focusing on tertiary prevention were excluded. Results Of the 4,632 records identified, 162 eligible original studies met the inclusion criteria. The volume of published HEEs has increased over time. Most studies (53.7%) assessed primary preventive interventions. Cost-effectiveness analysis was the most frequently applied HEE analysis type. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) are commonly reported as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained (42.4% of all ICERs). In 85.2% of the studies, the intervention was judged to be cost-effective. A model-based approach was used in 75.9% of the studies, and 81.3% of these studies relied partly on non-German data sources. More than half of all studies (56.1%) reported limitations due to a lack of German-specific data. Conclusions HEEs related to health promotion and disease prevention interventions in Germany exhibit substantial methodological heterogeneity. Frequent reliance on non-German data and the large proportion of interventions deemed cost-effective may reflect contextual data gaps and potential publication bias. These issues complicate the interpretation of economic evidence and pose challenges for decision-makers seeking to prioritize preventive strategies. Trial registration https://osf.io/h6749/overview

Health Economics ReviewVol. 16(1)
Zimmer Biomet (Netherlands) (NL), Kalaidos University of Applied Sciences (CH), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.