Literature DB >> 22493185

It is the lifetime that matters: public preferences over maximising health and reducing inequalities in health.

Paul Dolan1, Akil Tsuchiya.   

Abstract

Scarce healthcare resources can be allocated in many ways. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the UK focuses on the size of the benefit relative to costs, yet we know that there is support among clinicians and the general public for reducing inequalities in health. This paper shows how the UK general public trade-off these sometimes competing objectives, and the data we gather allow us to show the weight given to different population groups, for example, 1 extra year of life in full health to someone who would otherwise die at the age of 60 years is worth more than twice as much as an additional year of life to someone who would otherwise die at the age of 70 years. Such data can help inform the rationing decisions faced by all healthcare systems around the world.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22493185     DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100228

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  9 in total

1.  Distribution-Weighted Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Using Lifetime Health Loss.

Authors:  Ulrikke J V Hernæs; Kjell A Johansson; Trygve Ottersen; Ole F Norheim
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 4.981

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.  Lifetime QALY prioritarianism in priority setting: quantification of the inherent trade-off.

Authors:  Trygve Ottersen; Ottar Mæstad; Ole Frithjof Norheim
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2014-01-14

4.  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

5.  Incorporating equity in economic evaluations: a multi-attribute equity state approach.

Authors:  Jeff Round; Mike Paulden
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2017-06-01

6.  Health, priority to the worse off, and time.

Authors:  Anders Herlitz
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2018-12

7.  A flexible formula for incorporating distributive concerns into cost-effectiveness analyses: Priority weights.

Authors:  Øystein Ariansen Haaland; Frode Lindemark; Kjell Arne Johansson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Making use of equity sensitive QALYs: a case study on identifying the worse off across diseases.

Authors:  Frode Lindemark; Ole Frithjof Norheim; Kjell Arne Johansson
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2014-07-23

9.  Social Prescribing in National Health Service Primary Care: What Are the Ethical Considerations?

Authors:  Rebecca C H Brown; Kamal Mahtani; Amadea Turk; Stephanie Tierney
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 6.237

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.