IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient income and health innovation


  • Javad Moradpour
  • Aidan Hollis


This study analyzes the relationship between the number of clinical trials in a disease area, the health losses from that disease, and the average income of people suffering from it. Average patient income appears strongly predictive of the number of clinical trials, whether funded by industry or not. We are able to precisely estimate the relationship between income and the number of trials and to identify both (a) the specific diseases that appear to be underfunded relative to their harm to human health and (b) the amount of additional funding required to bring innovation investment up to the present average.

Suggested Citation

  • Javad Moradpour & Aidan Hollis, 2020. "Patient income and health innovation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(12), pages 1795-1803, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:29:y:2020:i:12:p:1795-1803
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.4160

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    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

    1. DiMasi, Joseph A. & Grabowski, Henry G. & Hansen, Ronald W., 2016. "Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: New estimates of R&D costs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 20-33.
    2. Pierre Dubois & Olivier de Mouzon & Fiona Scott-Morton & Paul Seabright, 2015. "Market size and pharmaceutical innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 46(4), pages 844-871, October.
    3. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2007. "Importation And Innovation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(6), pages 403-417.
    4. Eliana Barrenho & Marisa Miraldo & Peter C. Smith, 2019. "Does global drug innovation correspond to burden of disease? The neglected diseases in developed and developing countries," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(1), pages 123-143, January.
    5. Daron Acemoglu & Joshua Linn, 2004. "Market Size in Innovation: Theory and Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 119(3), pages 1049-1090.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Blog mentions

    As found by, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Chris Sampson’s journal round-up for 7th December 2020
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2020-12-07 12:00:03


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

    Cited by:

    1. Javad Moradpour & Aidan Hollis, 2021. "The economic theory of cost‐effectiveness thresholds in health: Domestic and international implications," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 1139-1151, May.

    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. Simona Gamba & Laura Magazzini & Paolo Pertile, 2019. "R&D and market size: who benefits from orphan drug regulation?," Working Papers 09/2019, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    2. Leila Agha & Soomi Kim & Danielle Li, 2020. "Insurance Design and Pharmaceutical Innovation," NBER Working Papers 27563, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Margaret K. Kyle, 2019. "The Alignment of Innovation Policy and Social Welfare: Evidence from Pharmaceuticals," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 20, pages 95-123, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Manuel Hermosilla, 2021. "Rushed Innovation: Evidence from Drug Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(1), pages 257-278, January.
    5. Gaessler, Fabian & Wagner, Stefan, 2019. "Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 176, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    6. Ruchir Agarwal & Patrick Gaulé, 2021. "What Drives Innovation? Lessons from COVID-19 R&D," IMF Working Papers 2021/048, International Monetary Fund.
    7. Massimo Florio & Simona Gamba, 2021. "Biomed Europa: After the coronavirus, a public infrastructure to overcome the pharmaceutical oligopoly," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 92(3), pages 387-409, September.
    8. Anna Chorniy & James Bailey & Abdulkadir Civan & Michael Maloney, 2021. "Regulatory review time and pharmaceutical research and development," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 113-128, January.
    9. Eric Budish & Benjamin Roin & Heidi Williams, 2013. "Do fixed patent terms distort innovation? Evidence from cancer clinical trials," Discussion Papers 13-001, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    10. Heidi L. Williams, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from Health Care Markets," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 53-87.
    11. Pierre Dubois & Morten Sæthre, 2020. "On the Effect of Parallel Trade on Manufacturers' and Retailers' Profits in the Pharmaceutical Sector," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(6), pages 2503-2545, November.
    12. Iain M. Cockburn & Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2016. "Patents and the Global Diffusion of New Drugs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(1), pages 136-164, January.
    13. Mark Pauly & Kyle Myers, 2016. "A Ricardian-Demand Explanation for Changing Pharmaceutical R&D Productivity," NBER Working Papers 22720, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Iizuka, Toshiaki & Uchida, Gyo, 2017. "Promoting innovation in small markets: Evidence from the market for rare and intractable diseases," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 56-65.
    15. Ugur, Mehmet & Trushin, Eshref, 2018. "Asymmetric information and heterogeneous effects of R&D subsidies: evidence on R&D investment and employment of R&D personel," Greenwich Papers in Political Economy 21943, University of Greenwich, Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre.
    16. Beerli, Andreas & Weiss, Franziska J. & Zilibotti, Fabrizio & Zweimüller, Josef, 2020. "Demand forces of technical change evidence from the Chinese manufacturing industry," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    17. Fiona M. Scott Morton & Ariel Dora Stern & Scott Stern, 2018. "The Impact of the Entry of Biosimilars: Evidence from Europe," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 53(1), pages 173-210, August.
    18. Schwardmann, Peter, 2019. "Motivated health risk denial and preventative health care investments," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 78-92.
    19. Margaret K. Kyle, 2018. "Are Important Innovations Rewarded? Evidence from Pharmaceutical Markets," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 53(1), pages 211-234, August.
    20. Jobjörnsson, Sebastian & Forster, Martin & Pertile, Paolo & Burman, Carl-Fredrik, 2016. "Late-stage pharmaceutical R&D and pricing policies under two-stage regulation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 298-311.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:wly:hlthec:v:29:y:2020:i:12:p:1795-1803. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: .

    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: Wiley Content Delivery (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 hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.