Monetary valuation of one year in full capability and health based on demographics, health status, income and well-being

References

• Vallejo-Torres L, García-Lorenzo B, Castilla I, et al. On the estimation of the cost-effectiveness threshold: why, what, how? Value Health. 2016 Jul;19:(5):558–566.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCabe C, Claxton K, Culyer AJ. The NICE cost-effectiveness threshold: what it is and what that means. PharmacoEconomics. 2008;26(9):733–744. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200826090-00004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brouwer W, Van Baal P, Van Exel J, et al. When is it too expensive? cost-effectiveness thresholds and health care decision-making. Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Mar;20:(2):175–180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarzer R, Rochau U, Saverno K, et al. Systematic overview of cost–effectiveness thresholds in ten countries across four continents. J Comp Eff Res. 2015 Sep;4:(5):485–504.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gloria MAJ, Thavorncharoensap M, Chaikledkaew U, et al. A systematic review of demand-side methods of estimating the societal monetary value of health gain. Value Health. 2021 Oct;24:(10):1423–1434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang L, Frijters P, Dalziel K, et al. Life satisfaction, QALYs, and the monetary value of health. Soc Sci Med. 2018 Aug;211:131–136. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.06.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Himmler S, Stöckel J, Van Exel J, et al. The value of health—empirical issues when estimating the monetary value of a quality‐adjusted life year based on well‐being data. Health Econ. 2021 Aug;30:(8):1849–1870.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beresniak A, Dupont D. Is there an alternative to quality-adjusted life years for supporting healthcare decision making? Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2016 May 03;16(3):351–357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen A. Capability and Well-Being. In: Nussbaum M, and Sen A, editors The quality of life. Oxford: Clarendon Press, Oxford; 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Himmler S, Van Exel J, Brouwer W. Estimating the monetary value of health and capability well-being applying the well-being valuation approach. Eur J Health Econ. 2020 Nov;21(8):1235–1244. doi: 10.1007/s10198-020-01231-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flynn TN, Huynh E, Peters TJ, et al. Scoring the Icecap‐a capability instrument. Estimation of a UK general population tariff. Health Econ. 2015; Mar24:(3):258–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Himmler S, Van Exel J, Brouwer W. Happy with your capabilities? Valuing ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A states based on experienced utility using subjective well-being data. Med Decis Making. 2020 May;40(4):498–510. doi: 10.1177/0272989X20923015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farkas M, Huynh E, Gulácsi L, et al. Development of population tariffs for the ICECAP-A instrument for Hungary and their comparison with the UK tariffs. Value Health. 2021 Dec;24:(12):1845–1852.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolan P. Developing methods that really do value the ‘Q’ in the QALY. Health Econ Policy Law. 2008 Jan;3(Pt 1):69–77. doi: 10.1017/S1744133107004355
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fujiwara D, Campbell R. Valuation techniques for social cost-benefit analysis: stated preference, revealed preference and subjective well-being approaches: a discussion of the current issues. London: HM Treasury; 2011. eng.
   Google Scholar
• Fujiwara D. A general method for valuing non-market goods using wellbeing data: three-stage wellbeing valuation. London, UK: London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Oecd. Cost-benefit analysis and the environment: further developments and policy use. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2018. doi: 10.1787/9789264085169-en
   Google Scholar
• STROBE 2024 [cited 2024 Jan 30]. Available from: https://www.strobe-statement.org/checklists/
   Google Scholar
• Heller GZ, Manuguerra M, Chow R. How to analyze the visual analogue scale: myths, truths and clinical relevance. Scand J Pain. 2016 Oct 01;13(1):67–75.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Coast J, Kinghorn P, Mitchell P. The development of capability measures in health economics: opportunities, challenges and progress. Patient. 2015 Apr;8(2):119–126. doi: 10.1007/s40271-014-0080-1
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Linton M-J, Mitchell PM, Al-Janabi H, et al. Comparing the German translation of the ICECAP-A capability wellbeing measure to the original english version: psychometric properties across healthy samples and seven health condition groups. Appl Res Quality Life. 2020 Jul;15:(3):651–673.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinghorn P, Afentou N. Eliciting a monetary threshold for a year of sufficient capability to inform resource allocation decisions in public health and social care. Soc Sci Med. 2021 Jun;279:113977. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113977
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mas-Expósito L, Amador-Campos JA, Gómez-Benito J, et al. Validation of the modified DUKE-UNC functional social support questionnaire in patients with schizophrenia. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2013 Oct;48:(10):1675–1685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martins S, Martins C, Almeida A, et al. The adapted DUKE-UNC functional social support questionnaire in a community sample of Portuguese parents. Res Social Work Pract. 2022 Jul;32:(5):596–606.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emerson SD, Guhn M, Gadermann AM. Measurement invariance of the satisfaction with life scale: reviewing three decades of research. Qual Life Res. 2017 Sep;26(9):2251–2264. doi: 10.1007/s11136-017-1552-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pavot W, Diener E. The satisfaction with life scale and the emerging construct of life satisfaction. J Posit Psychol. 2008 Apr;3(2):137–152. doi: 10.1080/17439760701756946
   Google Scholar
• Hungarian Central Statistical Office. The number of population and average age by sex [Internet]. 2023. Available from: https://www.ksh.hu/stadat_files/nep/en/nep0002.html.
   Google Scholar
• Hungarian Central Statistical Office. Economic activity of population of working age by sex [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2024 Jan 30]. Available from: https://www.ksh.hu/stadat_files/mun/en/mun0004.html.
   Google Scholar
• Hungarian Central Statistical Office. Number of population by highest educational qualification and sex [thousand persons] [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2024 Jan 30]. Available from: https://www.ksh.hu/stadat_files/mun/en/mun0006.html.
   Google Scholar
• Clark AE, Oswald AJ. A simple statistical method for measuring how life events affect happiness. Int J Epidemiol. 2002;31(6):1139–1144. doi: 10.1093/ije/31.6.1139
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolan P, Peasgood T, White M. Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being. J Econ Psychol. 2008 Feb 01;29(1):94–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu X, White H. Robustness checks and robustness tests in applied economics. J Econom. 2014 Jan;178:194–206. doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2013.08.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovács S, Németh B, Erdősi D, et al. Should Hungary pay more for a QALY gain than higher-income western European countries? Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2022 May;20:(3):291–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson A, Gyrd-Hansen D, Bacon P, et al. Estimating a WTP-based value of a QALY: the ‘chained’ approach. Soc Sci Med. 2013 Sep;92:92–104. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.05.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woods B, Revill P, Sculpher M, et al. Country-level cost-effectiveness thresholds: initial estimates and the need for further research. Value Health. 2016 Dec;19:(8):929–935.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar