• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

健康效用指数与公平性考量。

Health utility indices and equity considerations.

作者信息

Bleichrodt H

机构信息

Department of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Health Econ. 1997 Feb;16(1):65-91. doi: 10.1016/s0167-6296(96)00508-5.

DOI:10.1016/s0167-6296(96)00508-5
PMID:10167345
Abstract

The aim of this paper is to propose methods that incorporate equity concerns into cost utility analysis. The focus of the paper is on QALYs, but the results apply to health utility indices in general. Two interpretations of QALYs are considered: QALYs as (von Neumann Morgenstern) utilities and QALYs as measures of health. A justification is provided for aggregating consistently scaled "QALYs as utilities" over individuals. The conditions underlying unweighted aggregation of QALYs are identified. These conditions exclude two common types of equity concern. Algorithms are proposed that take into account equity concerns and that are relatively easy to apply.

摘要

本文旨在提出将公平性考量纳入成本效用分析的方法。本文重点关注质量调整生命年(QALYs),但研究结果一般适用于健康效用指数。文中考虑了对QALYs的两种解释:作为(冯·诺依曼 - 摩根斯坦)效用的QALYs和作为健康度量的QALYs。文中为在个体间一致地汇总经过尺度调整的“作为效用的QALYs”提供了理由。确定了QALYs未加权汇总所依据的条件。这些条件排除了两种常见的公平性考量类型。文中提出了考虑公平性考量且相对易于应用的算法。

相似文献

1
Health utility indices and equity considerations.健康效用指数与公平性考量。
J Health Econ. 1997 Feb;16(1):65-91. doi: 10.1016/s0167-6296(96)00508-5.
2
Estimating sign-dependent societal preferences for quality of life.评估基于体征的社会对生活质量的偏好。
J Health Econ. 2015 Sep;43:229-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2015.07.006. Epub 2015 Jul 31.
3
Reconciliation of economic concerns and health policy: illustration of an equity adjustment procedure using proportional shortfall.经济考量与卫生政策的协调:使用比例缺口的公平性调整程序示例
Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22(17):1097-107. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200422170-00001.
4
An epidemiological approach towards measuring the trade-off between equity and efficiency in health policy.一种衡量卫生政策中公平与效率之间权衡取舍的流行病学方法。
Health Policy. 1996 Mar;35(3):205-16. doi: 10.1016/0168-8510(95)00783-0.
5
Equity weights in the allocation of health care: the rank-dependent QALY model.医疗保健分配中的公平权重:秩相依质量调整生命年模型
J Health Econ. 2004 Jan;23(1):157-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2003.08.002.
6
Economics, QALYs and medical ethics: a practical agenda?经济学、质量调整生命年与医学伦理学:一项切实可行的议程?
Health Care Anal. 1995 Aug;3(3):229-32. doi: 10.1007/BF02197673.
7
QALYs (Quality Adjusted Life Years): a nurse's view.质量调整生命年(QALYs):护士的视角
Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 1993;6(5):17-23. doi: 10.1108/09526869310045822.
8
Efficiency and equity considerations in the preferences of health policy-makers in Israel.以色列卫生政策制定者偏好中的效率与公平考量。
Isr J Health Policy Res. 2017 Apr 1;6:18. doi: 10.1186/s13584-017-0142-7. eCollection 2017.
9
QALYs and justice.
Health Policy. 1989 Nov;13(2):115-20. doi: 10.1016/0168-8510(89)90066-3.
10
The importance of perspective in the measurement of quality-adjusted life years.视角在质量调整生命年测量中的重要性。
Med Decis Making. 1997 Jan-Mar;17(1):33-41. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9701700104.

引用本文的文献

1
Entitlements to continued life and the evaluation of population health.延续生命的权利与人口健康评估
Rev Econ Des. 2022 Jun 17:1-19. doi: 10.1007/s10058-022-00303-9.
2
Gambling on others' health: risky pro-social decision-making in the era of COVID-19.拿他人健康冒险:新冠疫情时代危险的亲社会决策
Front Psychol. 2024 Sep 19;15:1370778. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1370778. eCollection 2024.
3
Reference-dependent age weighting of quality-adjusted life years.参考依赖的质量调整生命年年龄加权。
Health Econ. 2022 Dec;31(12):2515-2536. doi: 10.1002/hec.4593. Epub 2022 Sep 4.
4
Incorporating Equity Concerns in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses: A Systematic Literature Review.将公平性问题纳入成本效益分析中:系统文献回顾。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2022 Jan;40(1):45-64. doi: 10.1007/s40273-021-01094-7. Epub 2021 Oct 29.
5
Fair innings? The utilitarian and prioritarian value of risk reduction over a whole lifetime.公平的机会?一生风险降低的功利主义和优先主义价值。
J Health Econ. 2021 Jan;75:102412. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2020.102412. Epub 2020 Nov 30.
6
Public Health Interventions with Harms and Benefits: A Graphical Framework for Evaluating Tradeoffs.公共卫生干预措施的利弊:权衡取舍的图形框架。
Med Decis Making. 2020 Nov;40(8):978-989. doi: 10.1177/0272989X20960458. Epub 2020 Sep 30.
7
A flexible formula for incorporating distributive concerns into cost-effectiveness analyses: Priority weights.将分配问题纳入成本效益分析的灵活公式:优先权重。
PLoS One. 2019 Oct 10;14(10):e0223866. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223866. eCollection 2019.
8
Hidden costs: The ethics of cost-effectiveness analyses for health interventions in resource-limited settings.隐藏成本:资源有限环境下卫生干预措施成本效益分析的伦理问题。
Glob Public Health. 2017 Oct;12(10):1269-1281. doi: 10.1080/17441692.2016.1178319. Epub 2016 May 4.
9
Health economics and health preference concepts to orthopedics practitioners.面向骨科从业者的健康经济学与健康偏好概念。
Acta Ortop Bras. 2014;22(2):102-5. doi: 10.1590/1413-78522014220200456.
10
On individual preferences and aggregation in economic evaluation in healthcare.论医疗保健经济评估中的个体偏好与汇总
Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;19(4):323-35. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200119040-00001.