The relative value of different QALY types

B-Tier
Journal: Journal of Health Economics
Year: 2020
Volume: 70
Issue: C

Authors (7)

Lancsar, Emily (Australian National University) Gu, Yuanyuan (Macquarie University) Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte (not in RePEc) Butler, Jim (not in RePEc) Ratcliffe, Julie (not in RePEc) Bulfone, Liliana (not in RePEc) Donaldson, Cam (not in RePEc)

Score contribution per author:

0.287 = (α=2.01 / 7 authors) × 1.0x B-tier

α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count

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.

Technical Details

RePEc Handle
repec:eee:jhecon:v:70:y:2020:i:c:s0167629618309573
Journal Field
Health
Author Count
7
Added to Database
2026-01-25