Literature DB >> 21506621

Valuing health at different ages: evidence from a nationally representative survey in the US.

Daniel Eisenberg1, Gary L Freed, Matthew M Davis, Dianne Singer, Lisa A Prosser.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Evidence about how people value health gains for different age groups is controversial and incomplete, despite the significance of this issue for priority setting in health policy.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to collect and analyse nationally representative data in the US regarding how people prioritize health programmes for children versus older adults.
METHODS: In January 2009, an online survey was administered to a nationally representative sample of US adults. Participants were asked for their preferences between health programmes benefiting 100 children aged 10 years versus health programmes benefiting a randomly varying number of adults aged 60 years. Participants were also asked about reasons for their choices.
RESULTS: The survey response rate was 64% (n = 2132). Most respondents favoured programmes for 100 children aged 10 years when compared with programmes benefiting as many as 1000 adults aged 60 years. This was true even for the respondent group least inclined to favour children - older adults without children aged <18 years.
CONCLUSION: US adults, regardless of sociodemographic characteristics, report preferences for health gains for children that go well beyond differentials that can be explained by relative life expectancy. Further work is needed to understand the extent to which these findings accurately reflect societal preferences.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21506621     DOI: 10.2165/11587340-000000000-00000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy        ISSN: 1175-5652            Impact factor:   2.561


  11 in total

1.  Public interest in medical research participation: differences by volunteer status and study type.

Authors:  Enesha M Cobb; Dianne C Singer; Matthew M Davis
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 4.689

Review 2.  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

3.  Variation in the spillover effects of illness on parents, spouses, and children of the chronically ill.

Authors:  Tara A Lavelle; Eve Wittenberg; Kara Lamarand; Lisa A Prosser
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 2.561

4.  A person trade-off study to estimate age-related weights for health gains in economic evaluation.

Authors:  Stavros Petrou; Ngianga-Bakwin Kandala; Angela Robinson; Rachel Baker
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Community-based values for 2009 pandemic influenza A H1N1 illnesses and vaccination-related adverse events.

Authors:  Tara A Lavelle; Martin I Meltzer; Achamyeleh Gebremariam; Kara Lamarand; Anthony E Fiore; Lisa A Prosser
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-12-19       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Can adult weights be used to value child health states? Testing the influence of perspective in valuing EQ-5D-Y.

Authors:  Paul Kind; Kristina Klose; Narcis Gusi; Pedro R Olivares; Wolfgang Greiner
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-04-19       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Prioritising patients for bariatric surgery: building public preferences from a discrete choice experiment into public policy.

Authors:  Jennifer A Whitty; Julie Ratcliffe; Elizabeth Kendall; Paul Burton; Andrew Wilson; Peter Littlejohns; Paul Harris; Rachael Krinks; Paul A Scuffham
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-10-15       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Age dependency of EQ-5D-Youth health states valuations on a visual analogue scale.

Authors:  Jim G A Retra; Brigitte A B Essers; Manuela A Joore; Silvia M A A Evers; Carmen D Dirksen
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2020-12-12       Impact factor: 3.186

9.  Innovations in cost-effectiveness analysis that advance equity can expand its use in health policy.

Authors:  Anton L V Avanceña; Lisa A Prosser
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2022-02

10.  Sexual diversity in the United States: Results from a nationally representative probability sample of adult women and men.

Authors:  Debby Herbenick; Jessamyn Bowling; Tsung-Chieh Jane Fu; Brian Dodge; Lucia Guerra-Reyes; Stephanie Sanders
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-20       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.