共 50 条
Approaches to Aggregation and Decision Making-A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [5]
被引:56
|作者:
Phelps, Charles E.
[1
]
Lakdawalla, Darius N.
[2
]
Basu, Anirban
[3
]
Drummond, Michael F.
[4
]
Towse, Adrian
[5
]
Danzon, Patricia M.
[6
]
机构:
[1] Univ Rochester, Polit Sci, Econ, Publ Hlth Sci, 30250 South Highway 1, Gualala, CA 95445 USA
[2] Univ Southern Calif, Schaeffer Ctr Hlth Policy & Econ, Los Angeles, CA USA
[3] Univ Washington, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[4] Univ York, Ctr Hlth Econ, York, N Yorkshire, England
[5] Off Hlth Econ, London, England
[6] Univ Penn, Wharton Sch, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
关键词:
aggregation;
cost-effectiveness;
equity;
multi-dimensioned benefits;
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS;
D O I:
10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.010
中图分类号:
F [经济];
学科分类号:
02 ;
摘要:
The fifth section of our Special Task Force report identifies and discusses two aggregation issues: 1) aggregation of cost and benefit information across individuals to a population level for benefit plan decision making and 2) combining multiple elements of value into a single value metric for individuals. First, we argue that additional elements could be included in measures of value, but such elements have not generally been included in measures of quality-adjusted life years. For example, we describe a recently developed extended cost-effectiveness analysis (ECEA) that provides a good example of how to use a broader concept of utility. ECEA adds two features measures of financial risk protection and income distributional consequences. We then discuss a further option for expanding this approach augmented CEA, which can introduce many value measures. Neither of these approaches, however, provide a comprehensive measure of value. To resolve this issue, we review a technique called multicriteria decision analysis that can provide a comprehensive measure of value. We then discuss budget-setting and prioritization using multicriteria decision analysis, issues not yet fully resolved. Next, we discuss deliberative processes, which represent another important approach for population- or plan-level decisions used by many health technology assessment bodies. These use quantitative information on CEA and other elements, but the group decisions are reached by a deliberative voting process. Finally, we briefly discuss the use of stated preference methods for developing "hedonic" value frameworks, and conclude with some recommendations in this area.
引用
收藏
页码:146 / 154
页数:9
相关论文