What is the price of life and why doesn't it increase at the rate of inflation?

Archives of Internal Medicine

Volumn 163, Issue 14, 2003, Pages 1637-1641

  Ubel, Peter A ^a   Hirth, Richard A ^b   Chernew, Michael E ^b   Fendrick, A Mark ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SILDENAFIL;

CHOLECYSTECTOMY; CHRONIC KIDNEY FAILURE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH INSURANCE; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; MEDICAID; MEDICARE; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR;

HEALTH CARE AND PUBLIC HEALTH;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 2; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; RISK FACTORS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0041807885     PISSN: 00039926     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archinte.163.14.1637     Document Type: Note

References (17)

1. Vijan S, Hofer TP, Hayward RA. Cost-utility analysis of screening intervals for diabetic retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. JAMA. 2000;283:889-896.
2. Newby KL, Eisenstein EL, Califf RM, et al. Cost effectiveness of early discharge after uncomplicated acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:749-755.
3. Smith KJ, Roberts MS. The cost-effectiveness of sildenafil. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:933-938.
4. Lerner M. Health insurers balkat paying $10 apiece for Viagra pills: Minnesota's three largest health plans say they need more time and details before they decide on whether - or to what extent - to pay. Star Tribune. June 3, 1998:1A.
5. Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Miller E, Fendrick AM, Weissert WG. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: in search of a standard. Med Decis Making. 2000;20:332-342.
6. Neumann PJ, Sandberg EA, Bell CM, Stone PW, Chapman RH. Are pharmaceuticals cost-effective? a review of the evidence. Health Aff (Millwood). 2000;19:92-109.
7. Ubel PA, Baron J, Nash B, Asch DA. Are preferences for equity over efficiency in health care allocation "all or nothing"? Med Care. 2000;38:366-373.
8. Ubel PA, Jepson C, Baron J, Hershey JC, Asch DA. The influence of cost-effectiveness information on physicians' cancer screening recommendations. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56:1727-1736.
9. Gold MR, Siegel J, Russell LB, Weinstein M, eds. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1996.
10. Hershey J, Asch DA, Jepson C, Baron J, Ubel PA. Incremental and average cost-effectiveness ratios: will physicians make a distinction? Risk Anal. 2003;23:81-89.
11. Ritov II, Baron J. Protected values and omission bias. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1999;79:79-94.
12. Eddy DM. Screening for cervical cancer. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113:214-226.
13. Fletcher S. Whither scientific deliberation in health policy recommendations? Alice in the Wonderland of breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:1180-1183.
14. Fendrick AM, Chernew ME, Hirth RA, Menon D. Understanding the behavioral response to medical innovation. Am J Manag Care. 1996;2:793-799.
15. Chernew ME, Fendrick AM, Hirth RA. Managed care and medical technology: implications for health care cost growth. Health Aff (Millwood). 1997;16:196-206.
16. Eddy DM. Oregon's methods: did cost-effectiveness fail? JAMA. 1991;266:2135-2141.
17. Hadorn DC. Setting health care priorities in Oregon: cost-effectiveness meets the rule of rescue. JAMA. 1991;265:2218-2225.