Cost Effectivess Analysis

Cost Effectivess Analysis] In this question, you will be checking the math of a published paper:Mittman, N. et al. (2018). Cost-effectiveness of mammography from a publicly funded health care system perspective. CMAJ Open, 6(1), E77 – E86. Retrieved from http://cmajopen.ca/content/6/1/E77.fullI find this to be an excellent paper, and some of you may find it a very interesting and worthwhile read, but it’s not necessary to read the paper for this question. We’ll only be looking at Table 4 on p. E82:Table Description automatically generatedI’ve rewritten the table in a more convenient format for calculations, and provided it as an Excel spreadsheet for those of you who’d prefer to perform the necessary calculations right in Excel.You’ll be doing three things: checking for dominance and extended/weak dominance, using those results to determine which of these mutually-exclusive scenarios are on the cost-effectiveness frontier, and then using incremental cost-effectiveness analysis to select the preferred treatment under two possible cost-effectiveness thresholds.The rewritten table is below. You may use the shorter ‘Treatment’ (A,B, etc.) names instead of my longer scenario labels (No Screening, TRI5069, etc.).2.aa. In the table below, write whether each treatment is dominated or extended/weakly dominated. In the case of extended/weak dominance, list the pair of treatments by which the treatment is dominated. (e.g. ‘F and H’ for Treatment G, if it is weakly dominated by F and H.)If a treatment is NOT dominated or weakly dominated, leave the relevant cells blank. In the extreme case where no treatments are either dominated or weakly/extended dominated, this means the correct answer would be leaving all the cells blank.