SynthesisPharmacoEconomics2020
Valuing Healthcare Goods and Services: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the WTA-WTP Disparity.
Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of the willingness-to-accept and willingness-to-pay disparities in empirical studies in the healthcare field.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Pooled it
- Determinants of willingness to pay for health services: a systematic review of contingent valuation studies.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2022Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of an educational intervention to reduce potentially inappropriate medication.Age and ageing · 2022Trial
- Influence of prior knowledge and experience on willingness to pay for home hospice services: a contingent valuation study.International journal of health economics and management · 2025Article
- Potential Clinical and Economic Impacts of Cutbacks in the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief Program in South Africa : A Modeling Analysis.Annals of internal medicine · 2025Article
- Time value of informal care of people with alzheimer's disease in Spain: a population-based analysis.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Article
- Prediction of COVID-19 patients' participation in financing informal care using machine learning methods: willingness to pay and willingness to accept approaches.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of the implementation of [Insights into imaging · 2022Article
- Willingness to bear economic costs of measures against SARS-CoV-2 in Germany.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Prevalence of Missing Values and Protest Zeros in Contingent Valuation in Dental Medicine.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Risk aversion, trust in institutions and contingent valuation of healthcare services: trying to explain the WTA-WTP gap in the Dutch population.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2021Article
- Dealing with Bad Risk in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: The Cost-Effectiveness Risk-Aversion Curve.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Article
- A Systematic Review of WTA-WTP Disparity for Dental Interventions and Implications for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Financial compensation for natural forest logging ban: Standard calculation based on willingness to accept.Science progressArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this systematic review was to review the available evidence on the disparity between willingness to accept (WTA) and willingness to pay (WTP) for healthcare goods and services.
methodsA tiered approach consisting of (1) a systematic review, (2) an aggregate data meta-analysis, and (3) an individual participant data meta-analysis was used. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Scisearch, and Econlit were searched for articles reporting both WTA and WTP for healthcare goods and services. Individual participant data were requested from the authors of the included studies.
resultsThirteen papers, reporting WTA and WTP from 19 experiments/subgroups, were included in the review. The WTA/WTP ratios reported in these papers, varied from 0.60 to 4.01, with means of 1.73 (median 1.31) for 15 estimates of the mean and 1.58 (median 1.00) for nine estimates of the median. Individual data obtained from six papers, covering 71.2% of the subjects included in the review, yielded an unadjusted WTA/WTP ratio of 1.86 (95% confidence interval 1.52-2.28) and a WTA/WTP ratio adjusted for age, sex, and income of 1.70 (95% confidence interval 1.42-2.02). Income category and age had a statistically significant effect on the WTA/WTP ratio. The approach to handling zero WTA and WTP values has a considerable impact on the WTA/WTP ratio found. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study imply that losses in healthcare goods and services are valued differently from gains (ratio > 1), but that the degree of disparity found depends on the method used to obtain the WTA/WTP ratio, including the approach to zero responses. Irrespective of the method used, the ratios found in our meta-analysis are smaller than the ratios found in previous meta-analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32096146What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.