160

Institute of Canada randomized trial in non small-cell lung cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology 8: 1301-1309, 1990

Jasper AC, Mohsenifar Z, Kahan S, Goldberg HS, Koerner SK. Cost-benefit comparison of aerosol bronchodilator delivery methods in hospitalized patients. Chest 91: 614-618, 1987

Joesoef MR, Remington PL, Jiptoherijanto PT. Epidemiological model and cost-effectiveness analysis of tuberculosis treatment programmes in Indonesia. International Journal of Epidemi­ology 18: 174-179, 1989

Kinosian BP, Eisenberg JM. Cutting into cholesterol. Cost-effec­tive alternatives for treating hypercholesterolemia. Journal of the American Medical Association 259: 2249-2254, 1988

Laird NM, Mosteller F. Some statistical methods for combining experimental results. International Journal of Technological Assessment in Health Care 6: 5-30, 1990

Martens LL, Rutten FFH, Erkelens W, Ascoop CAPL. Clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of lowering serum cholesterol levels: the case of simvastatin and cholestyramine in the Neth­erlands. American Journal of Cardiology 65: 27F-32F, 1990

McGhee DL. Probability of developing certain cardiovascular diseases at eight years at specified values of some character­istics. In Kannel WB & Gordon T (Eds) The Framingham study: an epidemiological investigation of cardiovascular disease, US Department of Health, Education and Welfare publication (NIH) 74-6\0, Bethesda Md, Public Health Service, 1977

Merigan Te. You can teach an old dog new tricks. How AIDS trials are pioneering new strategies. New England Journal of Medicine 323: 1341-1343, 1990

Oster G, Epstein AM. Cost-effectiveness of antihyperlipemic therapy in the prevention of coronary heart disease. The case of cholestyramine. Journal of the American Medical Associ­ation 258: 2381-2387, 1987

Patriarca PA, Arden NH, Koplan JP, Goodman RA. Prevention and control of type A influenza infections in nursing homes:

Erratum

PharmacoEconomics 1 (3) 1992

benefits and costs of four approaches using vaccination and amantadine. Annals of Internal Medicine \07: 732-740, 1987

Reves RR, Johnson PC, Ericsson CD, Dupont HL. A cost-effec­tiveness comparison of the use of antimicrobial agents for treatment or prophylaxis of travelers' diarrhea. Archives ofIn­ternal Medicine 148: 2421-2427, 1988

Rose G. Strategy of prevention: lessons from cardiovascular dis­ease. British Medical Journal 282: 1847-1851, 1981

Schulman KA, Kinosian B, Jacobson T A, Glick H, Willian MK, et al. Reducing high blood cholesterol level with drugs: cost­effectiveness of pharmacologic management. Journal of the American Medical Association 264: 3025-3033, 1990

Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: a review. Journal of Health Economics 5: 1-30, 1986

Weeks JC, Tierney MR, Weinstein Me. Cost effectiveness of pro­phylactic intravenous immune globulin in chronic lympho­cytic leukemia. New England Journal of Medicine 325: 81-86, 1991

Weinstein MC, Fineberg HV, Elstein AS, Frazier HS, Neuhauser D, et al. Clinical decision analysis. W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, 1980

Weinstein MC, Stason WB. Foundations of cost-effectiveness an­alysis for health and medical practices. New England Journal of Medicine 296: 716-721, 1977

Weinstein Me. Challenges for cost-effectiveness research. Medi­cal Decision Making 6: 194-198, 1986

Weinstein MC, Read JL, Mackay DN, Kresel JJ, Ashley H, et al. Cost-effective choice of antimicrobial therapy for serious in­fections. Journal of General Internal Medicine I: 351-363,1986

Correspondence and reprints: Dr Susan Hurley, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Alfred Hos­pital, Commercial Road, Prahran, Victoria 3181, Australia.

Vol. I, No. I, page 8: The final sentence of the third paragraph should read - 'Furthermore, a recent anonymous editorial in the Lancet (Anon 1991) highlighted the increasing use of economic data in pharmaceutical company promotional material, suggesting that it may be in contravention of the Medicines Act in the UK and that, in addition, the government staff overseeing promotion may not be competent to assess claims of cost-effectiveness.'