The relative value of different QALY types

Emily Lancsar; Yuanyuan Gu; Dorte Gyrd-Hansen; Jim Butler; Julie Ratcliffe; Liliana  Bulfone; Cam Donaldson

doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2020.102303

The relative value of different QALY types

Emily Lancsar
, Yuanyuan Gu
, Dorte Gyrd-Hansen
, Jim Butler
, Julie Ratcliffe
, Liliana Bulfone
, Cam Donaldson

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

42 Citations (Scopus)

112 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The oft-applied assumption in the use of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) in economic evaluation, that all QALYs are valued equally, has been questioned from the outset. The literature has focused on differential values of a QALY based on equity considerations such as the characteristics of the beneficiaries of the QALYs. However, a key characteristic which may affect the value of a QALY is the type of QALY itself. QALY gains can be generated purely by gains in survival, purely by improvements in quality of life, or by changes in both. Using a discrete choice experiment and a new methodological approach to the derivation of relative weights, we undertake the first direct and systematic exploration of the relative weight accorded different QALY types and do so in the presence of equity considerations; age and severity. Results provide new evidence against the normative starting point that all QALYs are valued equally.

Original language	English
Article number	102303
Pages (from-to)	1-13
Number of pages	13
Journal	Journal of Health Economics
Volume	70
Early online date	13 Feb 2020
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2020.102303
Publication status	Published - 1 Mar 2020

Bibliographical note

Copyright 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

Keywords

Discrete choice experiments
Equity
Priority setting
QALY types
QALYs
Relative weights

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jhealeco.2020.102303Licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Publisher version (open access)Final published version, 1.15 MBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{3cd7c69951f147cba100955d77cb49b7,

title = "The relative value of different QALY types",

abstract = "The oft-applied assumption in the use of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) in economic evaluation, that all QALYs are valued equally, has been questioned from the outset. The literature has focused on differential values of a QALY based on equity considerations such as the characteristics of the beneficiaries of the QALYs. However, a key characteristic which may affect the value of a QALY is the type of QALY itself. QALY gains can be generated purely by gains in survival, purely by improvements in quality of life, or by changes in both. Using a discrete choice experiment and a new methodological approach to the derivation of relative weights, we undertake the first direct and systematic exploration of the relative weight accorded different QALY types and do so in the presence of equity considerations; age and severity. Results provide new evidence against the normative starting point that all QALYs are valued equally.",

keywords = "Discrete choice experiments, Equity, Priority setting, QALY types, QALYs, Relative weights",

author = "Emily Lancsar and Yuanyuan Gu and Dorte Gyrd-Hansen and Jim Butler and Julie Ratcliffe and Liliana Bulfone and Cam Donaldson",

note = "Copyright 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.",

year = "2020",

month = mar,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.jhealeco.2020.102303",

language = "English",

volume = "70",

pages = "1--13",

journal = "Journal of Health Economics",

issn = "0167-6296",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The relative value of different QALY types

AU - Lancsar, Emily

AU - Gu, Yuanyuan

AU - Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte

AU - Butler, Jim

AU - Ratcliffe, Julie

AU - Bulfone, Liliana

AU - Donaldson, Cam

N1 - Copyright 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

PY - 2020/3/1

Y1 - 2020/3/1

N2 - The oft-applied assumption in the use of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) in economic evaluation, that all QALYs are valued equally, has been questioned from the outset. The literature has focused on differential values of a QALY based on equity considerations such as the characteristics of the beneficiaries of the QALYs. However, a key characteristic which may affect the value of a QALY is the type of QALY itself. QALY gains can be generated purely by gains in survival, purely by improvements in quality of life, or by changes in both. Using a discrete choice experiment and a new methodological approach to the derivation of relative weights, we undertake the first direct and systematic exploration of the relative weight accorded different QALY types and do so in the presence of equity considerations; age and severity. Results provide new evidence against the normative starting point that all QALYs are valued equally.

AB - The oft-applied assumption in the use of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) in economic evaluation, that all QALYs are valued equally, has been questioned from the outset. The literature has focused on differential values of a QALY based on equity considerations such as the characteristics of the beneficiaries of the QALYs. However, a key characteristic which may affect the value of a QALY is the type of QALY itself. QALY gains can be generated purely by gains in survival, purely by improvements in quality of life, or by changes in both. Using a discrete choice experiment and a new methodological approach to the derivation of relative weights, we undertake the first direct and systematic exploration of the relative weight accorded different QALY types and do so in the presence of equity considerations; age and severity. Results provide new evidence against the normative starting point that all QALYs are valued equally.

KW - Discrete choice experiments

KW - Equity

KW - Priority setting

KW - QALY types

KW - QALYs

KW - Relative weights

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85079283888

U2 - 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2020.102303

DO - 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2020.102303

M3 - Article

C2 - 32061405

SN - 0167-6296

VL - 70

SP - 1

EP - 13

JO - Journal of Health Economics

JF - Journal of Health Economics

M1 - 102303

ER -

The relative value of different QALY types

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this