Article Text
Abstract
Scarce healthcare resources can be allocated in many ways. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the UK focuses on the size of the benefit relative to costs, yet we know that there is support among clinicians and the general public for reducing inequalities in health. This paper shows how the UK general public trade-off these sometimes competing objectives, and the data we gather allow us to show the weight given to different population groups, for example, 1 extra year of life in full health to someone who would otherwise die at the age of 60 years is worth more than twice as much as an additional year of life to someone who would otherwise die at the age of 70 years. Such data can help inform the rationing decisions faced by all healthcare systems around the world.
- Public preferences
- lifetime health
- health inequality
- equity weights
- health economics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Justice and the NICE approach
- Incremental benefits of novel pharmaceuticals in the UK: a cross-sectional analysis of NICE technology appraisals from 2010 to 2020
- National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence appraisal and ageism
- NICE’s end of life decision making scheme: impact on population health
- Against proportional shortfall as a priority-setting principle
- Quality-adjusted life years
- Valuing health directly
- How to avoid unfair discrimination against disabled patients in healthcare resource allocation
- National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments
- Should age matter in COVID-19 triage? A deliberative study