Literature DB >> 11373840

Hypothetical versus real willingness to pay in the health care sector: results from a field experiment.

K Blumenschein1, M Johannesson, K K Yokoyama, P R Freeman.   

Abstract

We conducted a field experiment comparing hypothetical and real purchase decisions for a pharmacist provided asthma management program among 172 subjects with asthma. Subjects received either a dichotomous choice contingent valuation question or were given the opportunity to actually enroll in the program. Three different prices were used: US$ 15, 40, and 80. In the hypothetical group, 38% of subjects said that they would purchase the good at the stated price, but only 12% of subjects in the real group purchased the good (p = 0.000). We cannot, however, reject the null hypothesis that "definitely sure" hypothetical yes responses, as identified in a follow-up question, correspond to real yes responses. We conclude that the dichotomous choice contingent valuation method overestimates willingness to pay, but that it may be possible to correct for this overestimation by sorting out "definitely sure" yes responses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11373840     DOI: 10.1016/s0167-6296(01)00075-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Econ        ISSN: 0167-6296            Impact factor:   3.883


  30 in total

1.  Using respondents' uncertainty scores to mitigate hypothetical bias in community-based health insurance studies.

Authors:  Hermann Pythagore Pierre Donfouet; Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu; Eric Malin
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2011-12-10

2.  A Discrete Choice Experiment to Elicit Patient Willingness to Pay for Attributes of Treatment-Induced Symptom Relief in Comorbid. Insomnia.

Authors:  Anuja N Roy; S Suresh Madhavan; Andrew Lloyd
Journal:  Manag Care       Date:  2015-04

3.  Willingness-to-pay and demand curves: a comparison of results obtained using different elicitation formats.

Authors:  David K Whynes; Emma J Frew; Jane L Wolstenholme
Journal:  Int J Health Care Finance Econ       Date:  2005-12

4.  The value of a QALY: individual willingness to pay for health gains under risk.

Authors:  Ana Bobinac; Job van Exel; Frans F H Rutten; Werner B F Brouwer
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  How to support forest management in a world of change: results of some regional studies.

Authors:  C Fürst; C Lorz; H Vacik; N Potocic; F Makeschin
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2009-08-29       Impact factor: 3.266

6.  Value of a QALY and VSI estimated with the chained approach.

Authors:  S Olofsson; U-G Gerdtham; L Hultkrantz; U Persson
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2019-06-06

7.  Measuring the end-of-life premium in cancer using individual ex ante willingness to pay.

Authors:  S Olofsson; U-G Gerdtham; L Hultkrantz; U Persson
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2017-08-12

Review 8.  Describing treatment effects to patients.

Authors:  Annette Moxey; Dianne O'Connell; Patricia McGettigan; David Henry
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Valuing benefits to inform a clinical trial in pharmacy : do differences in utility measures at baseline affect the effectiveness of the intervention?

Authors:  Michela Tinelli; Mandy Ryan; Christine Bond; Anthony Scott
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Median-Based Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER).

Authors:  Heejung Bang; Hongwei Zhao
Journal:  J Stat Theory Pract       Date:  2012-08-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.