Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26296623›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2016

Comparative analysis of decision maker preferences for equity/efficiency attributes in reimbursement decisions in three European countries.

Petra Baji, Manuel García-Goñi, László Gulácsi, Emmanouil Mentzakis, Francesco Paolucci

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Priority setting in the German healthcare system: results from a discrete choice experiment.International journal of health economics and management · 2023
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Petra BajiDepartment of Health Economics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8., Budapest, 1093, Hungary. petra.baji@uni-corvinus.hu.
Manuel García-GoñiDepartamento de Economía Aplicada II, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
László GulácsiDepartment of Health Economics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8., Budapest, 1093, Hungary.
Emmanouil MentzakisEconomics Department, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Francesco PaolucciUniversity of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn addition to cost-effectiveness, national guidelines often include other factors in reimbursement decisions. However, weights attached to these are rarely quantified, thus decisions can depend strongly on decision-maker preferences.

objectiveTo explore the preferences of policymakers and healthcare professionals involved in the decision-making process for different efficiency and equity attributes of interventions and to analyse cross-country differences.

methodDiscrete choice experiments (DCEs) were carried out in Austria, Hungary, and Norway with policymakers and other professionals working in the health industry (N = 153 respondents). Interventions were described in terms of different efficiency and equity attributes (severity of disease, target age of the population and willingness to subsidise others, potential number of beneficiaries, individual health benefit, and cost-effectiveness). Parameter estimates from the DCE were used to calculate the probability of choosing a healthcare intervention with different characteristics, and to rank different equity and efficiency attributes according to their importance.

resultsIn all three countries, cost-effectiveness, individual health benefit and severity of the disease were significant and equally important determinants of decisions. All countries show preferences for interventions targeting young and middle aged populations compared to those targeting populations over 60. However, decision-makers in Austria and Hungary show preferences more oriented to efficiency than equity, while those in Norway show equal preferences for equity and efficiency attributes.

conclusionWe find that factors other than cost-effectiveness seem to play an equally important role in decision-making. We also find evidence of cross-country differences in the weight of efficiency and equity attributes.

Indexed as

Decision MakingEfficiency, OrganizationalAge FactorsChoice BehaviorCost-Benefit AnalysisEuropeGuidelines as TopicHealth Care RationingHumansSeverity of Illness IndexDiscrete choice experimentEquity-efficiency trade-offPriority settingReimbursement

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.