Willingness to pay: A method for measuring preferences for maternity care?

Birth

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 32-39

  Donaldson, Cam ^a   Hundley, Vanora ^b   Mapp, Tracy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^b ABERDEEN MATERNITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DELIVERY ROOM; ECONOMICS; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HOSPITAL DEPARTMENT; HUMAN; MIDWIFE; NURSING EVALUATION RESEARCH; PREGNANCY; SOCIOECONOMICS; UNITED KINGDOM;

ATTITUDE; DELIVERY ROOMS; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; FINANCING, PERSONAL; HUMANS; MIDWIFERY; NURSING EVALUATION RESEARCH; OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY DEPARTMENT, HOSPITAL; PREGNANCY; SCOTLAND; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 0032013353     PISSN: 07307659     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-536x.1998.00032.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Hundley V, Cruickshank F, Lang G, et al. Midwife managed delivery unit: A randomised controlled comparison with consultant led care. BMJ 1994;309:1400-1404.
2. Hundley V, Donaldson C, Lang GD, et al. Costs of intrapartum care in a midwife managed delivery unit and a consultant led labour ward. Midwifery 1995;11:103-109.
3. Hundley V, Cruickshank FM, Milne JM, et al. Satisfaction and continuity of care: Staff views of care in a midwife-managed delivery unit. Midwifery 1995;11:163-173.
4. Hundley V, Milne JM, Glazener C, Mollison J. Satisfaction and the three C's - continuity, choice and control - women's views from a randomised controlled trial of midwife-led care. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. In press.
5. Dupuit J. On the measurement of utility of public works. Translated by RH Barback in International Economic Papers 1952;2:83-110; from De la Mesure de l' Utilite des Travaux Publics. Ann Ponts Chaussees, 2nd series, 1844;8. In: Arrow KJ, Scitovsky T, eds. Readings in Welfare Economics. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1969.
6. Dupuit J. On the measurement of utility of public works. Translated by RH Barback in International Economic Papers 1952;2:83-110; from De la Mesure de l' Utilite des Travaux Publics. Ann Ponts Chaussees, 2nd series, 1844;8. In: Arrow KJ, Scitovsky T, eds. Readings in Welfare Economics. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1969.
7. Dupuit J. On the measurement of utility of public works. Translated by RH Barback in International Economic Papers 1952;2:83-110; from De la Mesure de l' Utilite des Travaux Publics. Ann Ponts Chaussees, 2nd series, 1844;8. In: Arrow KJ, Scitovsky T, eds. Readings in Welfare Economics. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1969.
8. Garbacz C, Thayer MA. An experiment in valuing senior companion program services. J Hum Resources 1983;18: 147-153.
9. Thompson MS. Willingness to pay and accept risks to cure chronic disease. Am J Public Health 1986;76:392-396
10. Department of Health. Changing Childbirth, Part I: Report of the Expert Maternity Group. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1993.
11. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: A review. J Health Econ 1986;5:1-30.
12. Mitchell R, Carson R. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 1989.
13. Hanemann WM. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. J Econ Perspectives 1994;8;19-43.
14. Office of Population Censuses and Surveys. Standard Occupational Classifications. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1991.
15. Greene WH. LIMDEP Version 6.0: User's Manual and Reference Guide. Bellport, NY: Econometric Software, 1991.
16. StataCorporation. Stata Statistical Software: Release 4.0. College Station, TX: Author, 1995.
17. Tobin J. Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables, Econometrica 1958;26;24-36.
18. Wetherill GB. Intermediate Statistical Methods. London: Chapman and Hall, 1981.
19. Chesher A, Irish M. Residual analysis in the grouped data and censored normal linear model. J Econometrics 1987;34; 33-61.
20. Ramsay JB. Tests for specification errors in classical Least squares regression analysis. J R Stat Soc (Series B) 1969;31; 350-371.
21. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE. Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods. Belmont, CA: Duxbury, 1987.
22. Donaldson C, Mapp T, Ryan M, Curtin K. Estimating the economic benefits of avoiding food-borne risk: Is "willingness to pay" feasible? Epidemiol Infect 1996;116:285-294.
23. Donaldson C, Shackley P. Does "process utility" exist? A case study of willingness to pay for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Soc Sci Med 1997;44:699-707.
24. Bohm P. Estimating demand for public goods: An experiment. Eur Econ Rev 1972;3:111-130.
25. Diamond PA, Hausman JA. Contingent valuation: Is some number better than no number? J Econ Perspectives 1994;8: 45-64.
26. Bateman I, Willis K, Garrod G. Consistency between contingent valuation estimates: A comparison of two studies of UK national parks. Regional Studies 1994;28:457-474.
27. Arrow K, Solow R, Portney PR, et al. Report of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration Panel of Contingent Valuation. Fed Register 1993;58 (10);4601-4614.
28. Jacoby A, Cartwright A. Finding out about the views and experiences of maternity-service users. In: Garcia J, Kilpatrick R, Richards M, eds. The Politics of Maternity Care Services for Childbearing Women in Twentieth-Century Britain. Oxford: Clarendon, 1990.