Literature DB >> 19216834

Explicit incorporation of equity considerations into economic evaluation of public health interventions.

Richard Cookson1, Mike Drummond, Helen Weatherly.   

Abstract

Health equity is one of the main avowed objectives of public health policy across the world. Yet economic evaluations in public health (like those in health care more generally) continue to focus on maximizing health gain. Health equity considerations are rarely mentioned. Health economists rely on the quasi-egalitarian value judgment that 'a QALY is a QALY'--that is QALYs are equally weighted and the same health outcome is worth the same no matter how it is achieved or to whom it accrues. This value judgment is questionable in many important circumstances in public health. For example, policy-makers may place rather little value on health outcomes achieved by infringing individual liberties or by discriminating on the basis of age, sex, or race. Furthermore, there is evidence that a majority of the general public wish to give greater weight to health gains accruing to children, the severely ill, and, to a lesser extent, the socio-economically disadvantaged. This paper outlines four approaches to explicit incorporation of equity considerations into economic evaluation in public health: (i) review of background information on equity, (ii) health inequality impact assessment, (iii) analysis of the opportunity cost of equity, and (iv) equity weighting of health outcomes. The first three approaches can readily be applied using standard methods of health technology assessment, where suitable data are available; whereas approaches for generating equity weights remain experimental. The potential benefits of considering equity are likely to be largest in cases involving: (a) interventions that target disadvantaged individuals or communities and are also relatively cost-ineffective and (b) interventions to encourage lifestyle change, which may be relatively ineffective among 'hard-to-reach' disadvantaged groups and hence may require re-design to avoid increasing health inequalities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19216834     DOI: 10.1017/S1744133109004903

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ Policy Law        ISSN: 1744-1331


  47 in total

1.  Are some QALYs more equal than others?

Authors:  E J van de Wetering; N J A van Exel; J M Rose; R J Hoefman; W B F Brouwer
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2014-12-06

2.  HTA - Algorithm or Process? Comment on "Expanded HTA: Enhancing Fairness and Legitimacy".

Authors:  Anthony J Culyer
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2016-08-01

Review 3.  Integrating social justice concerns into economic evaluation for healthcare and public health: A systematic review.

Authors:  Vadim Dukhanin; Alexandra Searle; Alice Zwerling; David W Dowdy; Holly A Taylor; Maria W Merritt
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  Balancing equity and efficiency in the Dutch basic benefits package using the principle of proportional shortfall.

Authors:  E J van de Wetering; E A Stolk; N J A van Exel; W B F Brouwer
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2011-08-26

5.  Incorporating Equity Concerns in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses: A Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Thomas Ward; Ruben E Mujica-Mota; Anne E Spencer; Antonieta Medina-Lara
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2021-10-29       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 6.  Outcome measurement in economic evaluations of public health interventions: a role for the capability approach?

Authors:  Paula K Lorgelly; Kenny D Lawson; Elisabeth A L Fenwick; Andrew H Briggs
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2010-05-06       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Research priorities for economic analyses of prevention: current issues and future directions.

Authors:  D Max Crowley; Laura Griner Hill; Margaret R Kuklinski; Damon E Jones
Journal:  Prev Sci       Date:  2014-12

Review 8.  A systematic review of stated preference studies reporting public preferences for healthcare priority setting.

Authors:  Jennifer A Whitty; Emily Lancsar; Kylie Rixon; Xanthe Golenko; Julie Ratcliffe
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

9.  GRADE equity guidelines 4: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: evidence to decision process.

Authors:  Kevin Pottie; Vivian Welch; Rachael Morton; Elie A Akl; Javier H Eslava-Schmalbach; Vittal Katikireddi; Jasvinder Singh; Lorenzo Moja; Eddy Lang; Nicola Magrini; Lehana Thabane; Roger Stanev; Elizabeth Matovinovic; Alexandra Snellman; Matthias Briel; Beverly Shea; Peter Tugwell; Holger Schunemann; Gordon Guyatt; Pablo Alonso-Coello
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 6.437

10.  Uncertainty Analysis in Intervention Impact on Health Inequality for Resource Allocation Decisions.

Authors:  Fan Yang; Ana Duarte; Simon Walker; Susan Griffin
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 2.583

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.