An equity framework for health technology assessments

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 428-441

  Culyer, Anthony J ^a,b   Bombard, Yvonne ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

casuistry; cost effectiveness analysis methodology; decision tool; deliberative processes; equity; fairness

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CANADA; CASUISTRY; CHECKLIST; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMICS; EPIDEMIOLOGY; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH DISPARITY; HUMAN; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL JUSTICE;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; CASUISTRY; CHECKLIST; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; HEALTH STATUS DISPARITIES; HUMANS; MODELS, ORGANIZATIONAL; ONTARIO; SOCIAL JUSTICE; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84861826247     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X11426484     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Culyer AJ. Hic sunt dracones: the future of HTA-one economist's perspective. J Med Decis Making. :
2. Office of Technology Assessment. Development of medical technology: opportunities for assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1976.
3. Lehoux P, Williams-Jones B. Mapping the integration of social and ethical issues in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007 ; 23 (1). 9-16
4. Hofmann B. Toward a procedure for integrating moral issues in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005 ; 21 (3). 312-8
5. Saarni SI, Hofmann B, Lampe K, Luhmann D, Mäkelä M, Velasco-Garrido M, et al. Ethical analysis to improve decisionmaking on health technologies. Bull World Health Org. 2008 ; 86 (8). 617-23
6. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Social value judgements: principles for the development of NICE guidance. London, UK: NICE; 2008.
7. Johri M, Norheim OF. Can cost-effectiveness analysis integrate equity concerns? A systematic review of current approaches. Paper given at the 12th annual ISPOR Conference ; 2009 Paris France ; 2009.
8. Cookson R, Drummond M, Weatherly H. Explicit incorporation of equity considerations into economic evaluation of public health interventions. Health Econ Policy Law. 2009 ; 4 (Pt 2). 231-45
9. Culyer AJ, Wagstaff A. QALYs (quality-adjusted life-years) versus HYEs (healthy years equivalents). J Health Econ. 1993 ; 12 (3). 311-23
10. Daniels N. Just health care. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 1985.
11. Brock DW Public health, ethics, and equity. Anand S Peter F Sen A, ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press ; 2004: 201-23.
12. Culyer AJ. Need: the idea won't do-but we still need it. Soc Sci Med. 1995 ; 40 (6). 727-30
13. Veatch RM. Ethical dimensions of the distribution of health care. New York: Praeger; 1982.
14. Daniels N. Accountability for reasonableness. BMJ. 2000 ; 321 (7272). 1300-1
15. Daniels N, Sabin J. The ethics of accountability in managed care reform. Health Aff (Millwood). 1998 ; 17 (5). 50-64
16. Daniels N, Sabin JE. Accountability for reasonableness: an update. BMJ. 2008 ; 337: a1850
17. Culyer A Principles of health care ethics. Ashcroft R Dawson A Draper H McMillan J, ed. Chichester, UK: Wiley ; 2007: 231-8.
18. Whitehead M. The concepts and principles of equity and health. Copenhagen: WHO; 1991.
19. Bleichrodt H, Quiggin J. Characterizing QALYs under a general rank-dependent utility model. J Risk Uncertain. 1997 ; 15: 151-65
20. Bleichrodt H, Diecidue E, Quiggin J. Equity weights in the allocation of health care: the rank-dependent QALY model. J Health Econ. 2004 ; 23 (1). 157-71
21. Dolan P. The measurement of individual utility and social welfare. J Health Econ. 1998 ; 17 (1). 39-52
22. Dolan P. Desperately seeking numbers: the not-so-holy grail of the "Super QALY". 20th Nordic HESG, Reykjavik, Iceland ; 1999 ; 1999.
23. Dolan P, Shaw R, Tsuchiya A, Williams A. QALY maximisation and people's preferences: a methodological review of the literature. Health Econ. 2005 ; 14 (2). 197-208
24. Dolan P, Tsuchiya A Companion to health economics. Jones A, ed. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar ; 2006: 382-391.
25. Johannesson M, Gerdtham U. A note on the estimation of the equity-efficiency trade-off for QALYs. J Health Econ. 1996 ; 15 (3). 359-68
26. Johannesson M, Johansson PO. Is the valuation of a QALY gained independent of age? Some empirical evidence. J Health Econ. 1997 ; 16 (5). 589-99
27. Johansson-Stenman O, Martinsson P. Are some lives more valuable? An ethical preferences approach. J Health Econ. 2008 ; 27 (3). 739-52
28. Kemm J itors. Health in all policies: prospects and potentials. Ståhl T Wismar M Ollila E Lahtinen E Leppo K, ed. Helsinki, Finland: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health ; 2006: 189-208.
29. Giacomini M, Hurley J, Gold I, Smith P, Abelson J. The policy analysis of "values talk": lessons from Canadian health reform. Health Policy. 2004 ; 67 (1). 15-24
30. Bombard Y. Public engagement pilot study on point-of-care international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring devices; 2009. Final Report to the Medical Advisory Secretariat ; 2009 Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, Toronto ; 2009.
31. Abelson J, Giacomini M, Lehoux P, Gauvin FP. Bringing "the public" into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: from principles to practice. Health Policy. 2007 ; 82 (1). 37-50
32. Bombard Y, Abelson J, Simeonov D, Gauvin FP. Eliciting social values and ethics in health technology assessment: a participatory approach. Soc Sci Med. 2011 ; 73 (1). 135-44
33. Nord E, Enge AU, Gundersen V. QALYs: is the value of treatment proportional to the size of the health gain?. Health Econ. 2010 ; 19 (5). 596-607
34. Nord E, Daniels N, Kamlet M. QALYs: some challenges. Value Health. 2009 ; 1: S10-5
35. Cropper ML, Aydede SK, Portney PR. Preferences for life saving programs: how the public discounts time and age. J Risk Uncertain. 1994 ; 8: 243-65
36. Williams AH, Cookson RA. Equity-efficiency trade-offs in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006 ; 22 (1). 1-9
37. Ubel PA, Loewenstein G. Distributing scarce livers: the moral reasoning of the general public. Soc Sci Med. 1996 ; 42 (7). 1049-55
38. Culyer AJ. The bogus conflict between efficiency and vertical equity. Health Econ. 2006 ; 15 (11). 1155-8
39. Tugwell P, Petticrew M, Kristjansson E, Welch V, Ueffing E, Waters E, et al. Assessing equity in systematic reviews: realising the recommendations of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. BMJ. 2010 ; 341: c4739
40. Karpowitz CF, Mansbridge J. Disagreement and consensus: the need for dynamic updating in public deliberation. Journal of Public Deliberation. 2005 ; 1 (2). 348-364
41. Perry CD. Does treating maternal depression improve child health management? The case of pediatric asthma. J Health Econ. 2008 ; 27 (1). 157-73
42. Diamandis M, White NM, Yousef GM. Personalized medicine: marking a new epoch in cancer patient management. Mol Cancer Res. 2010 ; 8 (9). 1175-87
43. Allison P. Measure of inequality. Am Sociol Rev. 1978 ; 43 (6). 865-80
44. Atkinson A, Bourguignon F. The comparison of multi-dimensioned distributions of economic status. Rev Econ Stud. 1982 ; 49: 182-201
45. Kim ES, Menon V. Status of women in cardiovascular clinical trials. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2009 ; 29 (3). 279-83
46. Kahneman D, Tversky A. Choices, values and frames. Am Psychol. 1984 ; 39 (4). 341-50
47. Kahneman D, Tversky A. Choices, values, and frames. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2000
48. Culyer A, Tompa E. Economic evaluation of interventions for occupational health and safety: developing good practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2008.
49. Reuzel RP, van der Wilt GJ, ten Have HA, de Vries Robbe PF. Reducing normative bias in health technology assessment: interactive evaluation and casuistry. Med Health Care Philos. 1999 ; 2 (3). 255-63
50. Ackerknecht EH. The role of medical history in medical education. Bull Hist Med. 1947 ; 21: 135-45
51. Rich G, Glass NJ, Selkon JB. Cost-effectiveness of two methods of screening for asymptomatic bacteriuria. Br J Prev Soc Med. 1976 ; 30 (1). 54-9
52. Tugwell P, de Savigny D, Hawker G, Robinson V. Applying clinical epidemiological methods to health equity: the equity effectiveness loop. BMJ. 2006 ; 332 (7537). 358-61
53. White M, Adams J, Heywood P Social Inequality and Public Health. Babones SJ, ed. Bristol, UK: The Policy Press ; 2009: 65-82.
54. Katz SJ, Hofer TP. Socioeconomic disparities in preventive care persist despite universal coverage: breast and cervical cancer screening in Ontario and the United States. JAMA. 1994 ; 272 (7). 530-4
55. Alexander FE, Anderson TJ, Brown HK, Forrest AP, Hepburn W, Kirkpatrick AE, et al. 14 years of follow-up from the Edinburgh randomised trial of breast-cancer screening. Lancet. 1999 ; 353 (9168). 1903-8
56. Dixon A, Le Grand J, Henderson J, Murray R, Poteliakoff E. Is the NHS equitable? A review of the evidence. London, UK; 2003. LSE Health and Social Care Discussion Paper No. 11, London School of Economics and Political Science.
57. Williams A. Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the "fair innings" argument. Health Econ. 1997 ; 6 (2). 117-32
58. Zivin K, Christakis NA. The emotional toll of spousal morbidity and mortality. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2007 ; 15 (9). 772-9
59. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London, UK: Nice; 2004.
60. Department of Health. A new value-based approach to the pricing of branded medicines: a consultation. United Kingdom Department of Health; 2010. London, UK.
61. Barr N. Economics of the welfare state. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2004.
62. Ueffing E, Tugwell P, Welch V, Petticrew M, Kristjansson E. C1, C2 equity checklist for systematic review. Authors. 2009 ;:
63. Tugwell P, Petticrew M, Kristjansson E, Welch V, Ueffing E, Waters E, et al. Assessing equity in systematic reviews: realising the recommendations of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. BMJ. 2010 ; 341: c4739
64. Department of Health. Health equity audit: a guide for the NHS. United Kingdom Department of Health; 2003. London, UK.
65. Littlejohn P, Rawlins M Patients, the public and priorities in healthcare. Oxford, UK: Radcliffe ; 2009: 109-23.
66. Frankel S. The Huli response to illness. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1986.