Article info
PDFJustice
Paper
Lifetime QALY prioritarianism in priority setting
- Correspondence to Trygve Ottersen, Department of Public Health and Primary Health Care, University of Bergen, Kalfarveien 31, Bergen 5018, Norway; trygve.ottersen{at}isf.uib.no
Citation
Lifetime QALY prioritarianism in priority setting
Publication history
- Received April 18, 2012
- Revised October 4, 2012
- Accepted October 17, 2012
- First published November 30, 2012.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
Article Versions
- Previous version (27 April 2016).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
Other content recommended for you
- Against lifetime QALY prioritarianism
- Against proportional shortfall as a priority-setting principle
- Pandemic prioritarianism
- Cemented, cementless, and hybrid prostheses for total hip replacement: cost effectiveness analysis
- The significance of ‘severity’
- Justice in COVID-19 vaccine prioritisation: rethinking the approach
- Implications of achieving TICI 2b vs TICI 3 reperfusion in patients with ischemic stroke: a cost-effectiveness analysis
- Do not despair about severity—yet
- Economic impact of potentially inappropriate prescribing and related adverse events in older people: a cost-utility analysis using Markov models
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of endovascular coiling and neurosurgical clipping for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage in Thailand