Literature DB >> 11010223

A qualitative study of the extent to which health gain matters when choosing between groups of patients.

P Dolan1, R Cookson.   

Abstract

There is considerable debate about the appropriateness of allocating health care resources on the basis of the size of the health improvement that they generate. The aim of this study was to elicit the general public's views about the extent to which health gain matters vis-a-vis other considerations. A total of 60 respondents took part in group discussions designed to enable them to raise, discuss, and reflect upon, different arguments. The qualitative data showed that many responses were being generated by factors that were not directly included in the questions, and so it is difficult to meaningfully interpret the results of other studies which have asked similar questions but which have not looked at the reasons underlying the responses. However, a clear message did come through from the data; namely, that equality of access should prevail over the maximization of benefits. However, this was subject to the outcome constraint that treatments are sufficiently effective. An important question for future research, then is 'how effective do treatments have to be for the principle of equal access to apply?'

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11010223     DOI: 10.1016/s0168-8510(99)00079-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Policy        ISSN: 0168-8510            Impact factor:   2.980


  15 in total

1.  Severity as an independent determinant of the social value of a health service.

Authors:  Jeff R J Richardson; John McKie; Stuart J Peacock; Angelo Iezzi
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2010-05-09

Review 2.  Eliciting reasons: empirical methods in priority setting.

Authors:  Andreas Hasman
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2003-03

3.  Public response to cost-quality tradeoffs in clinical decisions.

Authors:  Mary Catherine Beach; David A Asch; Christopher Jepson; John C Hershey; Tara Mohr; Stacey McMorrow; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2003 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 4.  Resource allocation, social values and the QALY: a review of the debate and empirical evidence.

Authors:  David L B Schwappach
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 5.  Is economic evaluation in touch with society's health values?

Authors:  Joanna Coast
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-11-20

Review 6.  Willingness to pay for a QALY: theoretical and methodological issues.

Authors:  Dorte Gyrd-Hansen
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 7.  Societal values in the allocation of healthcare resources: is it all about the health gain?

Authors:  Tania Stafinski; Devidas Menon; Deborah Marshall; Timothy Caulfield
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 3.883

8.  Priority setting and patient adaptation to disability and illness: outcomes of a qualitative study.

Authors:  John McKie; Rosalind Hurworth; Bradley Shrimpton; Jeff Richardson; Catherine Bell
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2014-09

9.  One and done? Equality of opportunity and repeated access to scarce, indivisible medical resources.

Authors:  Marco D Huesch
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2012-05-24       Impact factor: 2.652

Review 10.  A fair range of choice: justifying maximum patient choice in the British National Health Service.

Authors:  Stephen Wilmot
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2007-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.