Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38195152›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2024

Establishing cost-effectiveness threshold in China: a community survey of willingness to pay for a healthylife year.

Lizheng Xu, Mingsheng Chen, Blake Angell, Yawen Jiang, Kirsten Howard, Stephen Jan, Lei Si

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
40.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. A Delphi Study to Identify Priority Indicators for Formulary Selection of Innovative Anticancer Drugs in China.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year in Iran: a systematic review.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Lizheng XuThe George Institute for Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2881-0473
Mingsheng ChenNanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China cms@njmu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0001-9741-0986
Blake AngellThe George Institute for Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7188-7740
Yawen JiangSun Yat-Sen University School of Public Health Shenzhen, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.
Kirsten HowardMenzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, The University of Sydney Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Stephen JanThe George Institute for Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Lei SiSchool of Health Science, Western Sydney University, Penrith South, New South Wales, Australia.
UNSW Sydney · AUNanjing Medical University · CNSun Yat-sen University · CNThe University of Sydney · AUTranslational Research Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year gained (WTP/Q) is commonly used to determine whether an intervention is cost-effective in health technology assessment. This study aimed to evaluate the WTP/Q for different disease scenarios in a Chinese population.

methodsThe study employed a quadruple-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation method to estimate the WTP/Q in the general public. The estimation was conducted across chronic, terminal and rare disease scenarios. Face-to-face interviews were conducted in a Chinese general population recruited from Jiangsu province using a convenience sampling method. Interval regression analysis was performed to determine the relationship between respondents' demographic and socioeconomic conditions and WTP/Q. Sensitivity analyses of removing protest responses and open question analyses were conducted.

resultsA total of 896 individuals participated in the study. The WTP/Q thresholds were 128 000 Chinese renminbi (RMB) ($36 364) for chronic diseases, 149 500 RMB ($42 472) for rare diseases and 140 800 RMB ($40 000) for terminal diseases, equivalent to 1.76, 2.06 and 1.94 times the gross domestic product per capita in China, respectively. The starting bid value had a positive influence on participants' WTP/Q. Additionally, residing in an urban area (p<0.01), and higher household expenditure (p<0.01), educational attainment (p<0.02) and quality of life (p<0.02) were significantly associated with higher WTP/Q. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated the robustness of the results.

conclusionThis study implies that tailored or varied rather than a single cost-effectiveness threshold could better reflect community preferences for the value of a healthy year. Our estimates hold significance in informing reimbursement decision-making in health technology assessment in China.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeChinaCost-Benefit AnalysisEducational StatusHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesCross-sectional surveyHealth economicsHealth services researchHealth systems

Identifiers

PMID38195152
PMCPMC10806867
OpenAlexW4390699780

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.