• 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

质量调整生命年的双重贴现

Double discounting of QALYs.

作者信息

MacKeigan Linda D, Gafni Amiram, O'Brien Bernie J

机构信息

Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

出版信息

Health Econ. 2003 Feb;12(2):165-9. doi: 10.1002/hec.718.

DOI:10.1002/hec.718
PMID:12563665
Abstract

Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) calculated from time tradeoff (TTO) based preferences have a time preference component. To impose a conventional discount rate on these implicitly discounted QALYs introduces some degree of double discounting. The purpose of this study was to determine the magnitude of the double discounting effect and the effectiveness of a suggested method for avoiding double discounting in a TTO-based QALY model. Our analysis used holistic and composite preference scores obtained with the TTO technique in a prior study of four hypothetical treatment paths in type 2 diabetes. Discounted composite preference scores were significantly discrepant from holistic preference scores. Adjusting TTO-based quality weights prior to external discounting reduced the discrepancy only slightly. Since time preference effects may vary with health state context, the double discounting effect needs further investigation.

摘要

从基于时间权衡(TTO)的偏好计算得出的质量调整生命年(QALYs)具有时间偏好成分。对这些隐含贴现的QALYs施加传统贴现率会引入一定程度的双重贴现。本研究的目的是确定双重贴现效应的大小以及一种在基于TTO的QALY模型中避免双重贴现的建议方法的有效性。我们的分析使用了在先前一项关于2型糖尿病四种假设治疗路径的研究中通过TTO技术获得的整体和综合偏好分数。贴现后的综合偏好分数与整体偏好分数存在显著差异。在外部贴现之前调整基于TTO的质量权重只能稍微减少差异。由于时间偏好效应可能因健康状态背景而异,双重贴现效应需要进一步研究。

相似文献

1
Double discounting of QALYs.质量调整生命年的双重贴现
Health Econ. 2003 Feb;12(2):165-9. doi: 10.1002/hec.718.
2
Community or patient preferences for cost-effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation: does it matter?社区或患者对心脏康复成本效益的偏好:这重要吗?
Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2008 Oct;15(5):608-15. doi: 10.1097/HJR.0b013e328304fec1.
3
A utility-theoretic model for QALYs and willingness to pay.一种关于质量调整生命年(QALYs)与支付意愿的效用理论模型。
Health Econ. 2003 Jan;12(1):17-31. doi: 10.1002/hec.697.
4
The value-based medicine comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus.圆锥角膜穿透性角膜移植术基于价值的医学比较有效性和成本效益
Cornea. 2008 Oct;27(9):1001-7. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31817bb062.
5
Cost-utility analysis of cataract surgery in the second eye.第二只眼白内障手术的成本效用分析
Ophthalmology. 2003 Dec;110(12):2310-7. doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(03)00796-6.
6
Quality-adjusted life-years lack quality in pediatric care: a critical review of published cost-utility studies in child health.质量调整生命年在儿科护理中缺乏质量:对已发表的儿童健康成本效用研究的批判性综述。
Pediatrics. 2005 May;115(5):e600-14. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-2127.
7
Discounting in health care decision-making: time for a change?医疗保健决策中的贴现:是时候做出改变了吗?
J Public Health Med. 1992 Sep;14(3):250-6.
8
The value of correcting values: influence and importance of correcting TTO scores for time preference.校正价值观的价值:校正时间偏好 TTO 评分的影响和重要性。
Value Health. 2010 Dec;13(8):879-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00773.x.
9
On the possibility of a bridge between CBA and CEA: comments on a paper by Dolan and Edlin.关于CBA与CEA之间建立联系的可能性:对多兰和埃德林一篇论文的评论
J Health Econ. 2004 Sep;23(5):887-98. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2003.10.002.
10
Can we fix it? Yes we can! But what? A new test of procedural invariance in TTO-measurement.我们能解决它吗?是的,我们能!但解决什么呢?一种对时间权衡法测量中程序不变性的新测试。
Health Econ. 2008 Jul;17(7):877-85. doi: 10.1002/hec.1315.

引用本文的文献

1
Discounting in Economic Evaluations.经济性评价中的折扣
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Jul;36(7):745-758. doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0672-z.
2
Constantly proving the opposite? A test of CPTO using a broad time horizon and correcting for discounting.不断证明相反的观点?使用广阔的时间范围和贴现修正来检验 CPTO。
Qual Life Res. 2012 Feb;21(1):25-34. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9917-4. Epub 2011 Apr 21.
3
Individual differences in the use of the response scale determine valuations of hypothetical health states: an empirical study.应答量表使用中的个体差异决定了对假设健康状态的估值:一项实证研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 Apr 27;7:62. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-62.