An Exploration of parametric software cost estimating models for Jackson Systems Development

Most parametric software cost estimation models used today evolved in the late 70's and early 80's. At that time, the dominant software development techniques being used were the early 'structured methods'. Since then, several new systems development paradigms and methods have emerged, one being Jackson Systems Development (JSD). As current cost estimating methods do not take account of these developments, their non-universality means they cannot provide adequate estimates of effort and hence cost. In order to address these shortcomings two new estimation methods have been developed for JSD projects. One of these methods JSD-FPA, is a top-down estimating method, based on the existing MKII function point method. The other method, JSD-COCOMO, is a sizing technique which sizes a project, in terms of lines of code, from the process structure diagrams and thus provides an input to the traditional COCOMO method.The JSD-FPA method allows JSD projects in both the real-time and scientific application areas to be costed, as well as the commercial information systems applications to which FPA is usually applied. The method is based upon a three-dimensional view of a system specification as opposed to the largely data-oriented view traditionally used by FPA. The method uses counts of various attributes of a JSD specification to develop a metric which provides an indication of the size of the system to be developed. This size metric is then transformed into an estimate of effort by calculating past project productivity and utilising this figure to predict the effort and hence cost of a future project. The effort estimates produced were validated by comparing them against the effort figures for six actual projects.The JSD-COCOMO method uses counts of the levels in a process structure chart as the input to an empirically derived model which transforms them into an estimate of delivered source code instructions.

Using DEA to estimate potential savings at GP units at medical specialty level

The aim of this paper is to identify benchmark cost-efficient General Practitioner (GP) units at delivering health care in the Geriatric and General Medicine (GMG) specialty and estimate potential cost savings. The use of a single medical specialty makes it possible to reflect more accurately the medical condition of the List population of the Practice so as to contextualize its expenditure on care for patients. We use Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to estimate the potential for cost savings at GP units and to decompose these savings into those attributable to the reduction of resource use, to altering the mix of resources used and to those attributable to securing better resource 'prices'. The results reveal a considerable potential for savings of varying composition across GP units. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.

A model to assess the cost effectiveness of statins in achieving the UK National Service Framework target cholesterol levels

Background: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a public health priority in the UK. The National Service Framework (NSF) has set standards for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of CHD, which include the use of cholesterol-lowering agents aimed at achieving targets of blood total cholesterol (TC) < 5.0 mmol/L and low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) < 3.0 mmol/L. In order to achieve these targets cost effectively, prescribers need to make an informed choice from the range of statins available. Aim: To estimate the average and relative cost effectiveness of atorvastatin, fluvastatin, pravastatin and simvastatin in achieving the NSF LDL-C and TC targets. Design: Model-based economic evaluation. Methods: An economic model was constructed to estimate the number of patients achieving the NSF targets for LDL-C and TC at each dose of statin, and to calculate the average drug cost and incremental drug cost per patient achieving the target levels. The population baseline LDL-C and TC, and drug efficacy and drug costs were taken from previously published data. Estimates of the distribution of patients receiving each dose of statin were derived from the UK national DIN-LINK database. Results: The estimated annual drug cost per 1000 patients treated with atorvastatin was £289 000, with simvastatin £315 000, with pravastatin £333 000 and with fluvastatin £167 000. The percentages of patients achieving target are 74.4%, 46.4%, 28.4% and 13.2% for atorvastatin, simvastatin, pravastatin and fluvastatin, respectively. Incremental drug cost per extra patient treated to LDL-C and TC targets compared with fluvastafin were £198 and £226 for atorvastatin, £443 and £567 for simvastatin and £1089 and £2298 for pravastatin, using 2002 drug costs. Conclusions: As a result of its superior efficacy, atorvastatin generates a favourable cost-effectiveness profile as measured by drug cost per patient treated to LDL-C and TC targets. For a given drug budget, more patients would achieve NSF LDL-C and TC targets with atorvastatin than with any of the other statins examined.