Literature DB >> 32061405

The relative value of different QALY types.

Emily Lancsar1, Yuanyuan Gu2, Dorte Gyrd-Hansen3, Jim Butler4, Julie Ratcliffe5, Liliana Bulfone6, Cam Donaldson7.   

Abstract

The oft-applied assumption in the use of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) in economic evaluation, that all QALYs are valued equally, has been questioned from the outset. The literature has focused on differential values of a QALY based on equity considerations such as the characteristics of the beneficiaries of the QALYs. However, a key characteristic which may affect the value of a QALY is the type of QALY itself. QALY gains can be generated purely by gains in survival, purely by improvements in quality of life, or by changes in both. Using a discrete choice experiment and a new methodological approach to the derivation of relative weights, we undertake the first direct and systematic exploration of the relative weight accorded different QALY types and do so in the presence of equity considerations; age and severity. Results provide new evidence against the normative starting point that all QALYs are valued equally.
Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Discrete choice experiments; Equity; Priority setting; QALY types; QALYs; Relative weights

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32061405     DOI: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2020.102303

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


  6 in total

1.  Social acceptability of standard and behavioral economic inspired policies designed to reduce and prevent obesity.

Authors:  Emily Lancsar; Jemimah Ride; Nicole Black; Leonie Burgess; Anna Peeters
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2021-10-29       Impact factor: 2.395

2.  Letter: Neurosurgical Triage in the Pandemic Era.

Authors:  Timothy Lucas
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 4.654

3.  What Aspects of Illness Influence Public Preferences for Healthcare Priority Setting? A Discrete Choice Experiment in the UK.

Authors:  Liz Morrell; James Buchanan; Sian Rees; Richard W Barker; Sarah Wordsworth
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2021-08-19       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  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

5.  Diabolical dilemmas of COVID-19: An empirical study into Dutch society's trade-offs between health impacts and other effects of the lockdown.

Authors:  Caspar Chorus; Erlend Dancke Sandorf; Niek Mouter
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-09-16       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  What is it going to be, TTO or SG? A direct test of the validity of health state valuation.

Authors:  Stefan A Lipman; Werner B F Brouwer; Arthur E Attema
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2020-08-03       Impact factor: 2.395

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.