• 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

经济评估是否符合社会的健康价值观？

Is economic evaluation in touch with society's health values?

作者信息

Coast Joanna

机构信息

Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PR.

出版信息

BMJ. 2004 Nov 20;329(7476):1233-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7476.1233.

DOI:10.1136/bmj.329.7476.1233
PMID:15550430
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC529373/
Abstract

Health funding is increasingly based on the results of economic evaluation. But current methods fail to consider all society's health objectives and are too complex for policy makers to use

摘要

卫生保健资金越来越多地基于经济评估结果。但目前的方法没有考虑到社会所有的卫生目标，而且对于政策制定者来说过于复杂，难以采用。

相似文献

1
Is economic evaluation in touch with society's health values?经济评估是否符合社会的健康价值观？
BMJ. 2004 Nov 20;329(7476):1233-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7476.1233.
2
Economic evaluation and society's health values: price and value are different.经济评估与社会健康价值观：价格与价值不同。
BMJ. 2005 Feb 5;330(7486):311. doi: 10.1136/bmj.330.7486.311.
3
Economic evaluation and society's health values: view from the other side of the pond.经济评估与社会健康价值观：来自大洋彼岸的视角。
BMJ. 2005 Feb 5;330(7486):311. doi: 10.1136/bmj.330.7486.311-a.
4
In defence of societal sovereignty: a comment on Nyman 'the inclusion of survivor consumption in CUA'.捍卫社会主权：对尼曼《成本效用分析中纳入幸存者消费》的评论
Health Econ. 2006 Mar;15(3):311-3; discussion 319-22. doi: 10.1002/hec.1066.
5
Economic evaluation of health interventions.卫生干预措施的经济评估。
BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1204. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1204.
6
The history of NHS charges.英国国家医疗服务体系（NHS）收费的历史。
Contemp Br Hist. 2001;15(2):53-75. doi: 10.1080/713999405.
7
Measuring the social importance of concentration or dispersion of individual health benefits.衡量个体健康效益集中或分散的社会重要性。
Health Econ. 2002 Jan;11(1):43-53. doi: 10.1002/hec.643.
8
How much are health-care systems prepared to pay to produce a QALY?
Eur J Health Econ. 2005 Dec;6(4):285-7. doi: 10.1007/s10198-005-0325-y.
9
Axiomatic foundations for cost-effectiveness analysis.成本效益分析的公理化基础。
Health Econ. 2013 Dec;22(12):1405-16. doi: 10.1002/hec.2889. Epub 2013 Feb 26.
10
The changes the government is bringing to health and welfare benefits present challenges, but also opportunities.政府在医疗和福利方面所做的变革既带来了挑战，也带来了机遇。
Ment Health Today. 2015 Jul-Aug:7.

引用本文的文献

1
Scoring System for the Japanese Version of the ICECAP-A.ICECAP - A日语版评分系统。
Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2025 Mar 20;18:703-717. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S480328. eCollection 2025.
2
What are the priorities of consumers and carers regarding measurement for evaluation in mental healthcare? Results from a Q-methodology study.消费者和护理人员在精神卫生保健评估测量方面的优先事项是什么？一项 Q 方法学研究的结果。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2024 Nov 11;22(1):150. doi: 10.1186/s12961-024-01239-y.
3
Cost-consequence analysis of computer vision-based skin prick tests: implications for cost containment in Switzerland.基于计算机视觉的皮肤点刺试验的成本-后果分析：对瑞士成本控制的影响。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Aug 26;24(1):988. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11433-x.
4
Population normative data for OxCAP-MH capability scores.OxCAP-MH能力得分的人群规范数据。
Eur J Health Econ. 2025 Mar;26(2):223-231. doi: 10.1007/s10198-024-01696-w. Epub 2024 May 24.
5
Preventing postnatal depression in new mothers using telephone peer support: protocol for the DAISY (Depression and AnxIety peer Support studY) multi-centre randomised controlled trial.使用电话同伴支持预防新妈妈产后抑郁症：DAISY（抑郁和焦虑同伴支持研究）多中心随机对照试验方案。
BMJ Open. 2024 May 15;14(5):e087477. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-087477.
6
Validity, feasibility, and effectiveness of a voice-recognition based digital cognitive screener for dementia and mild cognitive impairment in community-dwelling older Chinese adults: A large-scale implementation study.基于语音识别的数字认知筛查工具在社区居住的老年华裔成年人中用于痴呆和轻度认知障碍的有效性、可行性和效果：一项大规模实施研究。
Alzheimers Dement. 2024 Apr;20(4):2384-2396. doi: 10.1002/alz.13668. Epub 2024 Feb 1.
7
Modelling Informal Carers' Health-Related Quality of Life: Challenges for Economic Evaluation.建模非正规照护者的健康相关生活质量：经济评估面临的挑战。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2024 Jan;22(1):9-16. doi: 10.1007/s40258-023-00834-4. Epub 2023 Nov 10.
8
Economic analysis of early intervention for autistic children: findings from four case studies in England, Ireland, Italy, and Spain.经济分析对自闭症儿童早期干预：来自英国、爱尔兰、意大利和西班牙的四个案例研究的发现。
Eur Psychiatry. 2023 Sep 21;66(1):e76. doi: 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2023.2449.
9
Formulation of a Mapping Formula to Estimate Well-Being Utility from Clinical Subjective Well-Being Scales.制定一个从临床主观幸福感量表估算幸福感效用的映射公式。
Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2022 Nov 4;15:3233-3241. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S383266. eCollection 2022.
10
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.

本文引用的文献

1
Interventions to improve access to health and social care after discharge from hospital: a systematic review.
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2003 Jul;8(3):171-9. doi: 10.1258/135581903322029539.
2
Use of pharmacoeconomics information--report of the ISPOR Task Force on use of pharmacoeconomic/health economic information in health-care decision making.药物经济学信息的使用——药物经济学与结果研究国际协会（ISPOR）医疗保健决策中药物经济学/卫生经济学信息使用特别工作组报告
Value Health. 2003 Jul-Aug;6(4):407-16. doi: 10.1046/j.1524-4733.2003.64245.x.
3
Virtual outreach: economic evaluation of joint teleconsultations for patients referred by their general practitioner for a specialist opinion.虚拟医疗服务推广：针对由全科医生转诊以获取专科医生意见的患者进行联合远程会诊的经济评估。
BMJ. 2003 Jul 12;327(7406):84. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7406.84.
4
Valuing the benefits and costs of health care programmes: where's the 'extra' in extra-welfarism?评估医疗保健项目的收益与成本：超福利主义中的“额外”因素何在？
Soc Sci Med. 2003 Mar;56(5):1121-33. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00101-6.
5
On the economic foundations of CEA. Ladies and gentlemen, take your positions!关于成本效益分析的经济基础。女士们，先生们，请就座！ （注：这里原英文文本“take your positions”直译为“就座”更符合语境，与“Ladies and gentlemen”相呼应，而不是单纯的“各就各位”，因为“各就各位”在一些语境下带有比赛等场景的特定意味，这里用“就座”更自然。）
J Health Econ. 2000 Jul;19(4):439-59. doi: 10.1016/s0167-6296(99)00038-7.
6
A qualitative study of the extent to which health gain matters when choosing between groups of patients.一项关于在不同患者群体之间进行选择时健康获益的重要程度的定性研究。
Health Policy. 2000 Feb;51(1):19-30. doi: 10.1016/s0168-8510(99)00079-2.
7
The influence of economic evaluation studies on decision making. A European survey. The EUROMET group.经济评估研究对决策的影响。一项欧洲调查。欧盟计量经济学小组。
Health Policy. 2000 Jul;52(3):179-92. doi: 10.1016/s0168-8510(00)00076-2.
8
The use of QALYS (quality-adjusted life years) in health service planning.质量调整生命年（QALYs）在卫生服务规划中的应用。
Int J Health Plann Manage. 1989 Oct-Dec;4(4):261-73. doi: 10.1002/hpm.4740040403.
9
Maximizing health benefits vs egalitarianism: an Australian survey of health issues.最大化健康益处与平等主义：一项关于健康问题的澳大利亚调查
Soc Sci Med. 1995 Nov;41(10):1429-37. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(95)00121-m.
10
The use of QALYs in health care decision making.质量调整生命年在医疗保健决策中的应用。
Soc Sci Med. 1989;28(4):299-308. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(89)90030-0.