IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v22y2002i1_supplp92-101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Preferences for Prevention versus Treatment Using Willingness to Pay

Author

Listed:
  • Phaedra S. Corso
  • James K. Hammitt
  • John D. Graham
  • Richard C. Dicker
  • Sue J. Goldie

Abstract

Background Rising health care costs and limited resources necessitate trade-offs between resources allocated toward prevention and those toward treatment. Information from opinion polls suggests citizens favor spending a higher proportion of all health care dollars on prevention rather than treatment. Objectives To assess the policy implications of willingness to pay (WTP) for use in cost-benefit analysis (CBA) as a method for capturing individual preferences for prevention and treatment in the context of resource allocation decisions. Methods The authors recruited a random sample of 1456 US residents age 18 years and greater by telephone using random-digit dialing. The survey was designed as a 3-stage (phone-mail-phone) process and was conducted between December 1998 and March 1999. For all persons completing the survey (N = 1104), the authors 1st collected respondents’ opinions about the costs and effectiveness of prevention versus treatment programs in general. Half of respondents were then asked to state their WTP for a hypothetical prevention scenario and half were asked to state their WTP for a hypothetical treatment scenario. Both scenarios were specific to the same health context and included an identical reduction in mortality risk. Results WTP for treatment was significantly greater than WTP for prevention, $665 and $223, respectively. Prior opinions on the relative effectiveness afforded by preventive and treatment interventions moderately influenced the WTP estimates for persons randomized to either scenario. Prior opinions on costs had no significant effect on WTP estimates for either scenario. WTP significantly increased with age and household income in the full sample but was not significantly affected by gender or educational attainment. Conclusions The aggregated WTP responses from the prevention and treatment scenarios presented in our study would imply that treatment is more strongly preferred by society than prevention when the health context is the same and benefits of each are held constant. A better understanding is needed of the discrepancy between citizens’ stated preferences for prevention (e.g., through polling) and our findings that they were willing to pay substantially more for treatment than for prevention.

Suggested Citation

  • Phaedra S. Corso & James K. Hammitt & John D. Graham & Richard C. Dicker & Sue J. Goldie, 2002. "Assessing Preferences for Prevention versus Treatment Using Willingness to Pay," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(1_suppl), pages 92-101, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:22:y:2002:i:1_suppl:p:92-101
    DOI: 10.1177/027298902237713
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/027298902237713
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/027298902237713?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johannesson, Magnus & Johansson, Per-Olov, 1997. "A note on prevention versus cure," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 181-187, September.
    2. Peter A. Ubel & Mark D. Spranca & Michael L. Dekay & John C. Hershey & David A. Asch, 1998. "Public Preferences for Prevention versus Cure: What if an Ounce of Prevention is Worth Only an Ounce of Cure?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 18(2), pages 141-148.
    3. Milton C. Weinstein & Donald S. Shepard & Joseph S. Pliskin, 1980. "The Economic Value of Changing Mortality Probabilities: A Decision-Theoretic Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 94(2), pages 373-396.
    4. Viscusi, W Kip, 1993. "The Value of Risks to Life and Health," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1912-1946, December.
    5. Ann Fisher & Lauraine G. Chestnut & Daniel M. Violette, 1989. "The value of reducing risks of death: A note on new evidence," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 88-100.
    6. Corso, Phaedra S & Hammitt, James K & Graham, John D, 2001. "Valuing Mortality-Risk Reduction: Using Visual Aids to Improve the Validity of Contingent Valuation," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 165-184, September.
    7. Jones-Lee, M W, 1992. "Paternalistic Altruism and the Value of Statistical Life," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(410), pages 80-90, January.
    8. Alberini Anna, 1995. "Optimal Designs for Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Surveys: Single-Bound, Double-Bound, and Bivariate Models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 287-306, May.
    9. Pratt, John W & Zeckhauser, Richard J, 1996. "Willingness to Pay and the Distribution of Risk and Wealth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 747-763, August.
    10. Subramanian, Uma & Cropper, Maureen, 2000. "Public Choices between Life Saving Programs: The Tradeoff between Qualitative Factors and Lives Saved," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 117-149, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Silvia Garrido & Ildefonso Méndez & José-María Abellán, 2013. "Analysing the Simultaneous Relationship Between Life Satisfaction and Health-Related Quality of Life," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 14(6), pages 1813-1838, December.
    2. James Hammitt & Nicolas Treich, 2007. "Statistical vs. identified lives in benefit-cost analysis," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 45-66, August.
    3. Rheinberger, Christoph M. & Herrera-Araujo, Daniel & Hammitt, James K., 2016. "The value of disease prevention vs treatment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 247-255.
    4. Gu, Yuanyuan & Lancsar, Emily & Ghijben, Peter & Butler, James RG & Donaldson, Cam, 2015. "Attributes and weights in health care priority setting: A systematic review of what counts and to what extent," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 41-52.
    5. Onwujekwe, Obinna & Hanson, Kara & Fox-Rushby, Julia, 2005. "Do divergences between stated and actual willingness to pay signify the existence of bias in contingent valuation surveys?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 525-536, February.
    6. Borghi, Josephine & Jan, Stephen, 2008. "Measuring the benefits of health promotion programmes: Application of the contingent valuation method," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 235-248, August.
    7. Kjær, Trine & Højgaard, Betina & Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte, 2019. "Physical exercise versus shorter life expectancy? An investigation into preferences for physical activity using a stated preference approach," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(8), pages 790-796.
    8. Douglas K. Owens, 2002. "Analytic Tools for Public Health Decision Making," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(1_suppl), pages 3-10, September.
    9. Herrera-Araujo, Daniel & Hammitt, James K. & Rheinberger, Christoph M., 2020. "Theoretical bounds on the value of improved health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Henrik Andersson & Nicolas Treich, 2011. "The Value of a Statistical Life," Chapters, in: André de Palma & Robin Lindsey & Emile Quinet & Roger Vickerman (ed.), A Handbook of Transport Economics, chapter 17, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Strand.J., 2001. "Public- and private-good values of statistical lives : results from a combined choice-experiment and contingent-valuation survey," Memorandum 31/2001, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    3. James K. Hammitt, 2002. "QALYs Versus WTP," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(5), pages 985-1001, October.
    4. James K. Hammitt, 2020. "Valuing mortality risk in the time of COVID-19," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 129-154, October.
    5. Anna Alberini, 2017. "Measuring the economic value of the effects of chemicals on ecological systems and human health," OECD Environment Working Papers 116, OECD Publishing.
    6. Hultkrantz, Lars & Svensson, Mikael, 2012. "The value of a statistical life in Sweden: A review of the empirical literature," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 302-310.
    7. Dionne, Georges & Lebeau, Martin, 2010. "Le calcul de la valeur statistique d’une vie humaine," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 86(4), pages 487-530, décembre.
    8. Bellavance, Franois & Dionne, Georges & Lebeau, Martin, 2009. "The value of a statistical life: A meta-analysis with a mixed effects regression model," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 444-464, March.
    9. Andersson, Henrik, 2013. "Consistency in preferences for road safety: An analysis of precautionary and stated behavior," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 41-49.
    10. James Hammitt & Jin-Tan Liu, 2004. "Effects of Disease Type and Latency on the Value of Mortality Risk," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 73-95, January.
    11. Henrik Andersson & James Hammitt & Gunnar Lindberg & Kristian Sundström, 2013. "Willingness to Pay and Sensitivity to Time Framing: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application on Car Safety," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(3), pages 437-456, November.
    12. Zheng, Jiakun, 2021. "Willingness to pay for reductions in health risks under anticipated regret," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    13. Rheinberger, Christoph M. & Schläpfer, Felix & Lobsiger, Michael, 2018. "A novel approach to estimating the demand value of public safety," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 285-305.
    14. Leiter, Andrea M. & Rheinberger, Christoph M., 2016. "Risky sports and the value of safety information," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 328-345.
    15. Andrea Leiter, 2011. "Age effects in monetary valuation of reduced mortality risks: the relevance of age-specific hazard rates," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 12(4), pages 331-344, August.
    16. Henrik Andersson & James K. Hammitt & Kristian Sundström, 2015. "Willingness to Pay and QALYs: What Can We Learn about Valuing Foodborne Risk?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 727-752, September.
    17. Branden B. Johnson & Adam M. Finkel, 2023. "Sensitivity to scope in estimating the social benefits of prolonging lives for regulatory decisions using national stated preference tradeoffs," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 509-528, September.
    18. Alberini, Anna & Ščasný, Milan, 2013. "Exploring heterogeneity in the value of a statistical life: Cause of death v. risk perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 143-155.
    19. Henrik Andersson & Mikael Svensson, 2008. "Cognitive ability and scale bias in the contingent valuation method," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(4), pages 481-495, April.
    20. Jiakun Zheng, 2021. "Willingness to pay for reductions in health risks under anticipated regret," Post-Print hal-04227414, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:22:y:2002:i:1_suppl:p:92-101. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.