Age-related preferences and age weighting health benefits
AbstractThis paper deals with the relevance of age in the paradigm of quality adjusted life years (QALYs). The first section outlines two rationales for incorporating age weights into QALYs. One of them is based on efficiency concerns; and the other on equity concerns. Both of these are theoretical constructs. The main purpose of this paper is to examine the extent of published empirical support for such age weighting. The second section is a brief survey of nine empirical studies that elicited age-related preferences from the general public. Six of these quantified the strength of the preferences, and these are discussed in more detail in the third section. The analysis distinguishes three kinds of age-related preference: productivity ageism, utilitarian ageism and egalitarian ageism. The relationship between them and their relevance to the two different rationales for age weighting are then explored. It is concluded that, although there is strong prima facie evidence of public support for both types of age weighting, the empirical evidence to support any particular set of weights is at present weak.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.
Volume (Year): 48 (1999)
Issue (Month): 2 (January)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Paul Dolan & Rebecca Shaw & Aki Tsuchiya & Alan Williams, 2005. "QALY maximisation and people's preferences: a methodological review of the literature," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(2), pages 197-208.
- Rob Baltussen & Elly Stolk & Dan Chisholm & Moses Aikins, 2006. "Towards a multi-criteria approach for priority setting: an application to Ghana," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(7), pages 689-696.
- Stolk, Elly A. & Pickee, Stefan J. & Ament, Andre H.J.A. & Busschbach, Jan J.V., 2005. "Equity in health care prioritisation: An empirical inquiry into social value," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 343-355, November.
- Shah, Koonal K., 2009. "Severity of illness and priority setting in healthcare: A review of the literature," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(2-3), pages 77-84, December.
- Aki Tsuchiya, 2000. "QALYs and ageism: philosophical theories and age weighting," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(1), pages 57-68.
- Eva Rodrï¿½guez & JosÃ© Luis Pinto, 2000. "The social value of health programmes: is age a relevant factor?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(7), pages 611-621.
- Mira Johri & Laura J. Damschroder & Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher & Peter A. Ubel, 2005. "The importance of age in allocating health care resources: does intervention-type matter?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(7), pages 669-678.
- Richardson, Jeff & Sinha, Kompal & Iezzi, Angelo & Maxwell, Aimee, 2012. "Maximising health versus sharing: Measuring preferences for the allocation of the health budget," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 75(8), pages 1351-1361.
- Elamin H. Elbasha, 2000. "Discrete time representation of the formula for calculating DALYs," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(4), pages 353-365.
- Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte, 2004. "Investigating the social value of health changes," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 1101-1116, November.
- Anabela Botelho & Lina Sofia LourenÃ§o-Gomes & LÃgia M.Costa Pinto, 2013. "Consumer preferences for apple: Comparing the results of contingent valuation method and a real purchasing situation," NIMA Working Papers, NÃºcleo de InvestigaÃ§Ã£o em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho 51, NÃºcleo de InvestigaÃ§Ã£o em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.