Title |
Lifetime QALY prioritarianism in priority setting: quantification of the inherent trade-off
|
---|---|
Published in |
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, January 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/1478-7547-12-2 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Trygve Ottersen, Ottar Mæstad, Ole Frithjof Norheim |
Abstract |
Multiple principles are relevant in priority setting, two of which are often considered particularly important. According to the greater benefit principle, resources should be directed toward the intervention with the greater health benefit. This principle is intimately linked to the goal of health maximization and standard cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). According to the worse off principle, resources should be directed toward the intervention benefiting those initially worse off. This principle is often linked to an idea of equity. Together, the two principles accord with prioritarianism; a view which can motivate non-standard CEA. Crucial for the actual application of prioritarianism is the trade-off between the two principles, and this trade-off has received scant attention when the worse off are specified in terms of lifetime health. This paper sheds light on that specific trade-off and on the public support for prioritarianism by providing fresh empirical evidence and by clarifying the close links between the findings and normative theory. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Brazil | 23 | 47% |
Canada | 1 | 2% |
Japan | 1 | 2% |
Norway | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 23 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 45 | 92% |
Scientists | 2 | 4% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 2% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 47 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 10 | 21% |
Researcher | 7 | 15% |
Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
Other | 5 | 10% |
Unknown | 15 | 31% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 29% |
Psychology | 5 | 10% |
Unspecified | 3 | 6% |
Social Sciences | 3 | 6% |
Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
Other | 6 | 13% |
Unknown | 15 | 31% |