A method to elicit utilities for interpersonal comparisons

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper examines how values should be assigned to health states when policy decisions must be made about who should receive treatment. The paper demonstrates that, if priority were to be assigned to those people who would benefit most from treatment, standard health-state utilities might fail to identify resource allocations that would maximize total health-related well- being in society. A new measurement instrument is proposed that is based on the direct comparison of the well-being achieved by different people in various health states and thus captures such community priorities. A sample of 72 health administration students used the instrument to evaluate speech and mobility dysfunctions as they afflicted hypothetical people who differed by gender, family status, and occupational type. This preliminary analysis indicates that the instrument is feasible to use, and that the valuations of respondents did, for some health conditions, significantly depend on the type of person afflicted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)10-20
Number of pages11
JournalMedical Decision Making
Volume17
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1997

Fingerprint

Health
Resource Allocation
Students
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • ethics
  • extended- sympathy instrument
  • health policy
  • interpersonal comparisons
  • utilities

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health Informatics
  • Health Information Management
  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

A method to elicit utilities for interpersonal comparisons. / Holmes, Ann.

In: Medical Decision Making, Vol. 17, No. 1, 01.01.1997, p. 10-20.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ebb79b90eb494d4aa18f40baaa20c844,
title = "A method to elicit utilities for interpersonal comparisons",
abstract = "This paper examines how values should be assigned to health states when policy decisions must be made about who should receive treatment. The paper demonstrates that, if priority were to be assigned to those people who would benefit most from treatment, standard health-state utilities might fail to identify resource allocations that would maximize total health-related well- being in society. A new measurement instrument is proposed that is based on the direct comparison of the well-being achieved by different people in various health states and thus captures such community priorities. A sample of 72 health administration students used the instrument to evaluate speech and mobility dysfunctions as they afflicted hypothetical people who differed by gender, family status, and occupational type. This preliminary analysis indicates that the instrument is feasible to use, and that the valuations of respondents did, for some health conditions, significantly depend on the type of person afflicted.",
keywords = "ethics, extended- sympathy instrument, health policy, interpersonal comparisons, utilities",
author = "Ann Holmes",
year = "1997",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0272989X9701700102",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "10--20",
journal = "Medical Decision Making",
issn = "0272-989X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A method to elicit utilities for interpersonal comparisons

AU - Holmes, Ann

PY - 1997/1/1

Y1 - 1997/1/1

N2 - This paper examines how values should be assigned to health states when policy decisions must be made about who should receive treatment. The paper demonstrates that, if priority were to be assigned to those people who would benefit most from treatment, standard health-state utilities might fail to identify resource allocations that would maximize total health-related well- being in society. A new measurement instrument is proposed that is based on the direct comparison of the well-being achieved by different people in various health states and thus captures such community priorities. A sample of 72 health administration students used the instrument to evaluate speech and mobility dysfunctions as they afflicted hypothetical people who differed by gender, family status, and occupational type. This preliminary analysis indicates that the instrument is feasible to use, and that the valuations of respondents did, for some health conditions, significantly depend on the type of person afflicted.

AB - This paper examines how values should be assigned to health states when policy decisions must be made about who should receive treatment. The paper demonstrates that, if priority were to be assigned to those people who would benefit most from treatment, standard health-state utilities might fail to identify resource allocations that would maximize total health-related well- being in society. A new measurement instrument is proposed that is based on the direct comparison of the well-being achieved by different people in various health states and thus captures such community priorities. A sample of 72 health administration students used the instrument to evaluate speech and mobility dysfunctions as they afflicted hypothetical people who differed by gender, family status, and occupational type. This preliminary analysis indicates that the instrument is feasible to use, and that the valuations of respondents did, for some health conditions, significantly depend on the type of person afflicted.

KW - ethics

KW - extended- sympathy instrument

KW - health policy

KW - interpersonal comparisons

KW - utilities

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031016612&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031016612&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0272989X9701700102

DO - 10.1177/0272989X9701700102

M3 - Article

C2 - 8994147

AN - SCOPUS:0031016612

VL - 17

SP - 10

EP - 20

JO - Medical Decision Making

JF - Medical Decision Making

SN - 0272-989X

IS - 1

ER -