Severity of illness versus expected benefit in societal evaluation of healthcare interventions
- 1 October 2001
- journal article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
- Vol. 1 (1) , 85-92
- https://doi.org/10.1586/14737167.1.1.85
Abstract
Society's valuation of a healthcare outcome depends not only on the size of the gain in well-being (utility), but also on the severity of the initial condition. This seems to be a major problem with the conventional utility-based QALY approach to outcome evaluation. In particular, QALY calculations based on utilities from multiattribute utility instruments assign too high value to interventions for people with mild and moderate health problems compared with interventions for people with severe and life threatening diseases. Analysts should somehow make corrections for this bias in economic evaluations of healthcare programs.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Do Nonpatients Underestimate the Quality of Life Associated with Chronic Health Conditions because of a Focusing Illusion?Medical Decision Making, 2001
- Health state values from multiattribute utility instruments need correctionAnnals of Medicine, 2001
- Towards Cost-Value Analysis in Health Care?Health Care Analysis, 1999
- EuroQol: the current state of playHealth Policy, 1996
- Individual Utilities Are Inconsistent with Rationing ChoicesMedical Decision Making, 1996
- The Person-trade-off Approach to Valuing Health Care ProgramsMedical Decision Making, 1995
- The trade-off between severity of illness and treatment effect in cost-value analysis of health careHealth Policy, 1993
- Quality of Life in Chronic Diseases: Perceptions of Elderly PatientsJournal of Gerontology, 1988
- Choices, values, and frames.American Psychologist, 1984
- Foundations of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Health and Medical PracticesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1977