Fairness in cost-benefit analysis: A methodology for health technology assessment

被引:15
作者
Samson, Anne-Laure [1 ]
Schokkaert, Erik [2 ,3 ]
Thebaut, Clemence [4 ]
Dormont, Brigitte [1 ]
Fleurbaey, Marc [5 ]
Luchini, Stephane [6 ,7 ]
Van de Voorde, Carine [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Paris 09, PSL Res Univ, LEDa Legos, Paris, France
[2] Univ Leuven, Dept Econ, Leuven, Belgium
[3] Catholic Univ Louvain, CORE, Louvain La Neuve, Belgium
[4] Univ Limoges, OMIJ, Haute Autorite Sante, Limoges, France
[5] Princeton Univ, Princeton, NJ 08544 USA
[6] Aix Marseille Univ, Aix Marseille Sch Econ, CNRS, Marseille, France
[7] EHESS, Paris, France
关键词
antihypertensive treatment; cost-benefit analysis; distributional weights; equivalent income; TIME TRADE-OFF; MATTERS;
D O I
10.1002/hec.3515
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
We evaluate the introduction of various forms of antihypertensive treatments in France with a distribution-sensitive cost-benefit analysis. Compared to traditional cost-benefit analysis, we implement distributional weighting based on equivalent incomes, a new concept of individual well-being that does respect individual preferences but is not subjectively welfarist. Individual preferences are estimated on the basis of a contingent valuation question, introduced into a representative survey of the French population. Compared to traditional cost-effectiveness analysis in health technology assessment, we show that it is feasible to go beyond a narrow evaluation of health outcomes while still fully exploiting the sophistication of medical information. Sensitivity analysis illustrates the relevancy of this richer welfare framework, the importance of the distinction between an ex ante and an ex post approach, and the need to consider distributional effects in a broader institutional setting.
引用
收藏
页码:102 / 114
页数:13
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1985, Commodities and Capabilities
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2008, Fairness, Responsibility and Welfare
[3]   Estimating sign-dependent societal preferences for quality of life [J].
Attema, Arthur E. ;
Brouwer, Werner B. F. ;
l'Haridon, Olivier ;
Pinto, Jose Luis .
JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2015, 43 :229-243
[4]   A REVIEW ARTICLE - THE CASE AGAINST THE USE OF THE SUM OF COMPENSATING VARIATIONS IN COST-BENEFIT-ANALYSIS [J].
BLACKORBY, C ;
DONALDSON, D .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS-REVUE CANADIENNE D ECONOMIQUE, 1990, 23 (03) :471-494
[5]   Standard gamble, time trade-off and rating scale: Experimental results on the ranking properties of QALYs [J].
Bleichrodt, H ;
Johannesson, M .
JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 1997, 16 (02) :155-175
[6]   The numeraire matters in cost-benefit analysis [J].
Brekke, KA .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 1997, 64 (01) :117-123
[7]  
Caussat L., 2005, DOSSIERS SOLIDARITE, V1, P7
[8]  
Decancq K., 2015, Handbook of Income Distribution, V2A, P67, DOI DOI 10.1016/B978-0-444-59428-0.00003-5
[9]  
Drèze J, 1998, J PUBLIC ECON, V70, P485
[10]  
Fleurbaey M., 2017, CES WORKING PAPERS