Putting the quality into quality-adjusted life years

Journal of Public Health Medicine

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 8-12

  Oliver, Adam ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

QALYs; Rating scale; Standard gamble; Time trade off

Indexed keywords

COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH SERVICE; HEALTH STATUS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; REVIEW; SOCIAL ASPECT; STANDARDIZATION;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; DATA COLLECTION; DECISION MAKING; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH CARE RATIONING; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOCIAL VALUES; TIME; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VALUE OF LIFE;

EID: 0037346133     PISSN: 09574832     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdg003     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. Commonwealth of Australia. Guidelines for the pharmaceutical industry on preparation of submissions to the pharmaceutical benefits advisory committee: including submissions involving economic analyses. Canberra, A.C.T.: Australian Government Printing Office, 1995.
2. Ministry of Health. Ontario guidelines for economic analysis of pharmaceutical products. Toronto, Ont.: Ministry of Health, 1994.
3. Sickness Funds Council. Dutch guidelines for pharmacoeconomic research. Amstelveen: Ziekenfondsraad, 1999.
4. Norwegian Medicines Control Authority. Norwegian guidelines for pharmacoeconomic analysis in connection with application for reimbursement. Oslo: Norwegian Medicines Control Authority (SLK), 1999.
5. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Available at http://www.nice.nhs.uk (3 January 2003, date last accessed).
6. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Technical guidance for manufacturers and sponsors on making a submission to a technology appraisal. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence, 2001.
7. Torrance GW, Feeny D, Furlong W. Visual analog scales: do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states? Med Decision Making 2001; 21: 329-334.
8. Bleichrodt H, Johannesson M. An experimental test of the theoretical foundation for rating-scale valuations. Med Decision Making 1997; 17:208-216.
9. Robinson A, Loomes G, Jones-Lee M. Visual analog scales, standard gambles and relative risk aversion. Med Decision Making 2001; 21: 17-27.
10. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales. A practical guide to their development and use. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.
11. Torrance GW, Thomas W, Sackett D. A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programs. Hlth Serv Res 1972; 7: 118-133.
12. Broome J. Qalys. J Publ Econ 1993; 50: 149-167.
13. Johannesson M, Pliskin JS, Weinstein MC. A note on QALYs, time tradeoff, and discounting. Med Decision Making 1994; 14: 188-193.
14. Dolan P, Jones-Lee M. The time trade-off: a note on the effect of lifetime reallocation of consumption and discounting. J Hlth Econ 1997; 16: 731-739.
15. Fuchs VR. Time preference and health: an exploratory study. In: Fuchs VR, ed. Economic aspects of health. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1982: 93-120.
16. Cairns J. Discounting and health effects for medical decisions. In: Sloan FA, ed. Valuing health care: costs, benefits and effectiveness of pharmaceuticals and medical technologies. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992: 123-145.
17. Dolan P, Gudex C. Time preference, duration and health state valuations: Hlth Econ 1995; 4:289-299.
18. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. J Hlth Econ 1986; 5: 1-30.
19. Torrance GW, Feeny D. Utilities and quality-adjusted life years. Int J Technol Assess Hlth Care 1989; 5: 559-575.
20. Read JL, Quinn RJ, Berwick DM, Fineberg HV, Weinstein MC. Preferences for health outcomes: comparison of assessment methods. Med Decision Making 1984; 4: 315-329.
21. Richardson J. Cost utility analysis: what should be measured? Social Sci Med 1994; 39: 7-21.
22. Oliver A. At the end of the beginning: eliciting cardinal values for health states. LSE Health and Social Care Discussion Paper No. 2. London: London School of Economics and Political Science, 2002.
23. Llewellyn-Thomas H, Sutherland HJ, Tibshirani R, et al. The measurement of patients' values in medicine. Med Decision Making 1982;2:449-462.
24. Rutten-van Molken MPMH, Bakker CH, van Doorslaer EKA, van der Linden S. Methodological issues of patient utility measurement. Med Care 1995; 33: 922-937.
25. Bleichrodt H. Probability weighting in choice under risk: an empirical test. J Risk Uncertainty 2001; 23: 185-198.
26. Nord E. Cost-value analysis in health care: making sense out of QALYs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.