Nord Erik, Menzel Paul, Richardson Jeff
Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Health Econ. 2006 Feb;15(2):215-8. doi: 10.1002/hec.1063.
In an earlier article in Health Economics, Salomon and Murray argue that by applying maximum likelihood techniques to predetermined functional forms and to a data set where a number of health states are valued by means of four standard valuation techniques, underlying 'pure' valuations of health may be teased out, together with estimates of parametric relationships between these 'pure' valuations and valuations based on the four standard techniques. We argue below that 'pure' valuations of health are ordinal rather than cardinal and that the 'pure' values that result from the multi-method approach give a false impression of being cardinal. They are therefore not usable as weights for life years. In the unlikely event that the authors should be able to demonstrate cardinality in 'pure' valuations of health, it must be possible to have subjects express these valuations directly, in which case there seems to be no need for the indirect multi-method approach.
在《健康经济学》早期的一篇文章中,所罗门和默里认为,通过将最大似然技术应用于预先确定的函数形式以及一个通过四种标准估值技术对多种健康状态进行估值的数据集,可以梳理出潜在的健康“纯”估值,以及这些“纯”估值与基于四种标准技术的估值之间的参数关系估计。我们在下文论证,健康的“纯”估值是序数而非基数,并且多方法方法得出的“纯”值给人一种是基数的错误印象。因此,它们不能用作生命年的权重。万一作者能够证明健康“纯”估值中的基数性,那么必须能够让受试者直接表达这些估值,在这种情况下,似乎就不需要间接的多方法方法了。