Methodological and applied concerns surrounding age-related weighting within health economic evaluation

References

• National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. NICE; London, UK: 2013
   Google Scholar
• Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC).Guidance to manufacturers for completion of new product assessment form (NPAF). SMC; Glasgow, UK: 2007
   Google Scholar
• Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC). Guidelines for preparing submissions to the pharmaceutical benefits advisory committee. version 4.3 PBAC; Canberra, Australia: 2008
   Google Scholar
• Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health (CADTH). Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies: Canada. CADTH; Ottawa, Canada: 2006
   Google Scholar
• Torrance GW, Feeny D. Utilities and quality-adjusted life years. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1989;5(4):559-75
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dakin HA, Devlin NJ, Odeyemi IA. “Yes”, “No” or “Yes, but”? Multinomial modelling of NICE decision-making. Health Policy 2006;77(3):352-67
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cleemput I, Neyt M, Thiry N, et al. Using threshold values for cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained in healthcare decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2011;27(1):71-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Bekker-Grob EW, Ryan M, Gerard K. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ 2012;21(2):145-72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coast J, Flynn TN, Natarajan L, et al. Valuing the ICECAP capability index for older people. Soc Sci Med 2008;67(5):874-82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Culyer A, McCabe C, Briggs A, et al. Searching for a threshold, not setting one: the role of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. J Health Serv Res Policy 2007;12(1):56-8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shah KK. Severity of illness and priority setting in healthcare: a review of the literature. Health Policy 2009;93(2-3):77-84
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shah KK, Tsuchiya A, Wailoo AJ. Valuing health at the end of life: an empirical study of public preferences. Eur J Health Econ 2014;15(4):389-99
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ubel PA, Baron J, Asch DA. Social responsibility, personal responsibility, and prognosis in public judgments about transplant allocation. Bioethics 1999;13(1):57-68
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tsuchiya A, Dolan P, Shaw R. Measuring people’s preferences regarding ageism in health: some methodological issues and some fresh evidence. Soc Sci Med 2003;57(4):687-96
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nord E, Street A, Richardson J, et al. The significance of age and duration of effect in social evaluation of health care. Health Care Anal 1996;4(2):103-11
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blomquist GC, Miller TR, Levy DT. Values of risk reduction implied by motorist use of protection equipment - new evidence from different populations. J Transp Econ Policy 1996;30(1):55-66
   Google Scholar
• Mount T, Weng W, Schulze W, Chestnut L. Automobile safety and the value of statistical life in the family: valuing reduced risk for children, adults and the elderly. Cornell University; Ithaca, NY, USA: 2000
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins RR, Owens N, Wiggins LB. Valuing reduced risks to children: the case of bicycle safety helmets. Contemp Econ Policy 2001;19(4):397-408
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leung J, Guria J. Value of statistical life: adults versus children. Accident Anal Prev 2006;38(6):1208-17
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Agee M, Crocker T. Smoking Parents’ valuations of own and children’s health. Paper presented at the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists Workshop. Bar Harbor, ME, USA 2001
   Google Scholar
• Nastis S, Crocker T. Pregnant mother’s valuation of own and of child health. Paper presented at the US EPA workshop on Valuing Environmental Health Risks to Children. Washington, DC, USA 2003
   Google Scholar
• Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Salomon J, Tsuchiya A. Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. Oxford University Press; Oxford, UK: 2007
   Google Scholar
• Liu JT, Hammitt JK, Wang JD, Liu JL. Mother’s willingness to pay for her own and her child’s health: a contingent valuation study in Taiwan. Health Econ 2000;9(4):319-26
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dickie M, Ulery VL. Valuing health in the household: are kids worth more than adults? Paper presented at the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists Workshop. Bar Harbor, ME, USA 2001
   Google Scholar
• Dickie M, Messman VL. Parental altruism and the value of avoiding acute illness: are kids worth more than parents? J Environ Econ Manage 2004;48:1146-74
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prosser LA, Bridges CB, Uyeki TM, et al. Values for preventing influenza-related morbidity and vaccine adverse events in children. Health Qual Life Out 2005;3:18
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Charny MC, Lewis PA, Farrow SC. Choosing who shall not be treated in the NHS. Soc Sci Med 1989;28(12):1331-8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Busschbach JJV, Hessing DJ, Decharro FT. The utility of health at different stages in life - a quantitative approach. Soc Sci Med 1993;37(2):153-8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nord E, Richardson J, Street A, et al. Maximizing health benefits vs egalitarianism: an Australian survey of health issues. Soc Sci Med 1995;41(10):1429-37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez E, Pinto JL. The social value of health programmes: is age a relevant factor? Health Econ 2000;9(7):611-21
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jelsma J, Shumba D, Kristian H, et al. Preferences of urban Zimbabweans for health and life lived at different ages. Bull World Health Organ 2002;80(3):204-9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tsuchiya A. The value of health at different ages. Centre for Health Economics, University of York; York, UK: 2001
   Google Scholar
• Aldy JE, Viscusi WK. Age differences in the value of statistical life: revealed preference evidence. Rev Environ Econ Policy 2007;1(2):241-60
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker R, Bateman I, Donaldson C, et al. Weighting and valuing quality-adjusted life-years using stated preference methods: preliminary results from the Social Value of a QALY Project. Health Technol Assess 2010;14(27):1-162
   Google Scholar
• Prosser LA, Payne K, Rusinak D, et al. Valuing health across the lifespan: health state preferences for seasonal influenza illnesses in patients of different ages. Value Health 2011;14(1):135-43
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Prosser LA, Payne K, Rusinak D, et al. Using a discrete choice experiment to elicit time trade-off and willingness-to-pay amounts for influenza health-related quality of life at different ages. Pharmacoeconomics 2013;31(4):305-15
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eisenberg D, Freed GL, Davis MM, et al. Valuing health at different ages: evidence from a nationally representative survey in the US. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2011;9(3):149-56
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Petrou S, Kandala NB, Robinson A, Baker R. A person trade-off study to estimate age-related weights for health gains in economic evaluation. Pharmacoeconomics 2013;31(10):893-907
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Whitty JA, Ratcliffe J, Chen G, Scuffham PA. Australian public preferences for the funding of new health technologies: a comparison of discrete choice and profile case best-worst scaling methods. Med Decis Making 2014; In press
   Google Scholar
• Dolan P, Olsen JA, Menzel P, Richardson J. An inquiry into the different perspectives that can be used when eliciting preferences in health. Health Econ 2003;12(7):545-51
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wailoo A, Tsuchiya A. Briefing paper for methods review workshop on QALY weighting. NICE; London, UK: 2011
   Google Scholar
• Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996;37(1):53-72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M, Torrance GW. Multi-attribute health status classification systems. Health utilities index. Pharmacoeconomics 1995;7(6):490-502
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002;21(2):271-92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan M. Using conjoint analysis to take account of patient preferences and go beyond health outcomes: an application to in vitro fertilisation. Soc Sci Med 1999;48(4):535-46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier J, Deverill M, Green C, et al. A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 1999;3(9):i-iv.1-164
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dolan P, Shaw R, Tsuchiya A, Williams A. QALY maximisation and people’s preferences: a methodological review of the literature. Health Econ 2005;14(2):197-208
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrou S. Methodological issues raised by preference-based approaches to measuring the health status of children. Health Econ 2003;12(8):697-702
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eiser C, Morse R. Quality-of-life measures in chronic diseases of childhood. Health Technol Assess 2001;5(4):1-157
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Torrance GW. Utility measurement in healthcare: the things I never got to. Pharmacoeconomics 2006;24(11):1069-78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green C. On the societal value of health care: what do we know about the person trade-off technique? Health Econ 2001;10(3):233-43
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dolan P, Tsuchiya A. The person trade-off method and the transitivity principle: an example from preferences over age weighting. Health Econ 2003;12(6):505-10
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Johri M, Damschroder LJ, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA. The importance of age in allocating health care resources: does intervention-type matter? Health Econ 2005;14(7):669-78
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lancsar E, Wildman J, Donaldson C, et al. Deriving distributional weights for QALYs through discrete choice experiments. J Health Econ 2011;30(2):466-78
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ryan M, Amaya-Amaya M. ‘Threats’ to and hopes for estimating benefits. Health Econ 2005;14(6):609-19
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Robinson S, Bryan S. Does the process of deliberation change individuals’ health state valuations? An exploratory study using the person trade-off technique. Value Health 2013;16(5):806-13
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Baddeley M. Herding, social influence and economic decision-making: socio-psychological and neuroscientific analyses. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2010;365(1538):281-90
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrou S, Gray A. Economic evaluation alongside randomised controlled trials: design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. BMJ 2011;342:d1548
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrou S, Gray A. Economic evaluation using decision analytical modelling: design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. BMJ 2011;342:d1766
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan A, Chick SE, Davies R. A taxonomy of model structures for economic evaluation of health technologies. Health Econ 2006;15(12):1295-310
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karnon J, Haji Ali Afzali H. When to use discrete event simulation (DES) for the economic evaluation of health technologies? A review and critique of the costs and benefits of DES. Pharmacoeconomics 2014; In press
   Google Scholar
• Mitton C, Donaldson C. Twenty-five years of programme budgeting and marginal analysis in the health sector, 1974-1999. J Health Serv Res Policy 2001;6(4):239-48
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mortimer D. Reorienting programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) towards disinvestment. BMC Health Serv Res 2010;10:288
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grosse SD. Assessing cost-effectiveness in healthcare: history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2008;8(2):165-78
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Martin S, Rice N, Smith PC. Does health care spending improve health outcomes? Evidence from English programme budgeting data. J Health Econ 2008;27(4):826-42
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Claxton K MS, Soares M, Rice N, et al. Methods for the estimation of the NICE cost effectiveness threshold. Centre for Health Economics, discussion paper 81 University of York, York, UK: 2013
   Google Scholar
• Johannesson M, Johansson PO. Is the valuation of a QALY gained independent of age? Some empirical evidence. J Health Econ 1997;16(5):589-99
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ratcliffe J. Public preferences for the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation. Health Econ 2000;9(2):137-48
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Williams A, Evans JG. The rationing debate. Rationing health care by age. BMJ 1997;314(7083):820-5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Evans JG. Aging and rationing. BMJ 1991;303(6807):869-70
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Guindo LA, Wagner M, Baltussen R, et al. From efficacy to equity: literature review of decision criteria for resource allocation and healthcare decision making. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2012;10(1):9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson E, Sussex J, Macleod C, Fordham R. Prioritizing health technologies in a primary care trust. J Health Serv Res Policy 2007;12(2):80-5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar