Literature DB >> 2521138

QALYs: are they enough? A health economist's perspective.

G Mooney1.   

Abstract

John Rawles's criticism of QALYs are seen as being both imprecise and largely unhelpful. This paper accepts that there are problems in both QALYs themselves and in the current decision-making processes with which they seek to help. The QALY pliers tend to play down the former and the QALY knockers the latter. It is suggested that theories (regret theory and prospect theory) other than expected utility theory, which is normally seen as the basis for QALYs, may provide better approaches to measuring health service outputs. Thus equity, information and decision-making per se are not handled as well in the expected utility QALYs as they could be. Developing better QALYs, with qualifications, is the goal.

Keywords:  Health Care and Public Health

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2521138      PMCID: PMC1375806          DOI: 10.1136/jme.15.3.148

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


  4 in total

Review 1.  Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal.

Authors:  G W Torrance
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  QALYfying the value of life.

Authors:  J Harris
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Do patients want to participate in medical decision making?

Authors:  W M Strull; B Lo; G Charles
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1984-12-07       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  What do patients value? Willingness to pay for ultrasound in normal pregnancy.

Authors:  D M Berwick; M C Weinstein
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 2.983

  4 in total
  7 in total

1.  Economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: a critical appraisal of seven studies on cholesterol-lowering agents.

Authors:  P Gazzaniga; L Garattini
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Should financial incentives be used to differentially reward 'me-too' and innovative drugs?

Authors:  Brita Pekarsky
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  An Investigation of the Overlap Between the ICECAP-A and Five Preference-Based Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments.

Authors:  Lidia Engel; Duncan Mortimer; Stirling Bryan; Scott A Lear; David G T Whitehurst
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  The QALY argument: a physician's and a philosopher's view.

Authors:  J Rawles; K Rawles
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 2.903

5.  Rationing health care resources. Is the quality-adjusted life-year a helpful guide?

Authors:  J M Warren
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 6.  Good quality quality? Some methodological issues.

Authors:  C E Selai; R M Rosser
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 7.  Conceptualising 'Benefits Beyond Health' in the Context of the Quality-Adjusted Life-Year: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis.

Authors:  Lidia Engel; Stirling Bryan; David G T Whitehurst
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2021-08-23       Impact factor: 4.981

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.