Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34794496›Full record

ArticleArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2021

The application of the QALY measure in the assessment of the effects of health interventions on an older population: a systematic scoping review.

Ewa Kocot, Paulina Kotarba, Katarzyna Dubas-Jakóbczyk

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2021. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ewa KocotHealth Economics and Social Security Department, Institute of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland. ewa.kocot@uj.edu.pl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1160-9826
Paulina KotarbaDepartment of Health, Małopolska Provincial Office in Krakow, Krakow, Poland.
Katarzyna Dubas-JakóbczykHealth Economics and Social Security Department, Institute of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6368-2868
Jagiellonian University · PLMalopolska Higher Vocational School of J. Dietl in Kraków · PL

Funding

uniwersytet jagielloński collegium medicum N43/DBS/000125
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne of the most commonly used types of evaluation methods is cost-utility analysis (CUA), using the Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) indicator as a preference-based measure for assessing effects of a given programme. Such assessments are often translated into health-care provision priorities; therefore, effectively choosing the method of outcome evaluation is crucial for ensuring the best possible allocation of scarce resources. The main objective of this scoping review is to identify what kinds of problems and limitations may occur when the QALY indicator is used to assess the effects of health interventions in the older population.

methodsTo identify literature in a scoping review, the databases MEDLINE via PubMed and Scopus were searched. A manual search on relevant organizations' and associations' websites was also conducted (EUnetHTA, ISPOR and national governmental agencies responsible for allocation decisions). No limits concerning publication dates were set. All relevant data were extracted and analyzed, then a narrative summary was prepared.

resultsThe database search identified 10,832 relevant items, finally 32 studies were included in the analysis. The main types of issues indicated in the studies were as follows: (1) lower life expectancy in the older population causes lower QALY gains; (2) an equal value of one QALY is used regardless of age; (3) poorer average health state causes lower QALY gains; (4) inadequate instruments to measure quality of life (QoL); (5) attributes of QoL used regardless of age; and (6) no beyond-health QoL aspects taken into account.

conclusionsThis review shows clearly that many problems of different types are connected with using QALY for the older population, but there is no consensus as to whether QALY discriminates against the older population or not - an opinion regarding this issue depends strongly on accepted principles, particularly the approach to equity and how one understands fairness. Health care resources should not be allocated solely on the basis of the health maximization rule because this can lead to discrimination against certain groups (e.g., older, disabled, and/or chronically ill people). To maintain the balance between efficiency and equity, the issues connected with age-based rationing should be widely discussed.

Indexed as

Older populationQuality adjusted life year (QALY)Resource allocation

Identifiers

PMID34794496
PMCPMC8600812
OpenAlexW3211736376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.