ArticleGlobal health research and policy2025
How policymakers value end-of-life treatments for rare and common diseases in China: evidence from a contingent valuation study.
Article in Global health research and policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding policymakers' value judgements in reimbursement decisions is essential for promoting equity and guiding informed healthcare decision-making. This study aimed to estimate and compare Chinese policymakers' willingness-to-pay (WTP) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) specifically in end-of-life treatment scenarios involving life-threatening common and rare diseases.
methodsWe conducted a contingent valuation study employing single-bounded dichotomous-choice questions among 120 experts formally appointed by China's National Healthcare Security Administration to serve on the National Reimbursement Drug List Expert Committee in recent years. Participants evaluated hypothetical scenarios describing end-of-life treatments providing a one-QALY gain for patients with life-threatening common or rare diseases. Data were collected primarily through face-to-face interviews, supplemented by online responses when in-person meetings were impractical. Statistical analysis was performed using probit regression models, and t-tests were conducted to compare WTP values between scenarios.
resultsA total of 99 policymakers participated. Participants' WTP per QALY for end-of-life treatments in common disease scenarios ranged from CNY 78,031 (0.98 times GDP per capita) to CNY 126,449 (1.58 times GDP per capita). In contrast, WTP was significantly higher for rare diseases, ranging from CNY 183,392 (2.29 times GDP per capita) to CNY 219,691 (2.75 times GDP per capita). Analysis of individual characteristics revealed that female participants and those with expertise in pharmacoeconomics exhibited significantly higher WTP values in common disease scenarios (p < 0.05), though these factors had varied effects in rare disease scenarios.
conclusionsThis study provides novel estimates of Chinese policymakers' WTP per QALY specifically in end-of-life contexts involving common and rare diseases, highlighting the significant impact of disease rarity on reimbursement decisions. These findings offer empirical support for adopting differentiated cost-effectiveness thresholds tailored to end-of-life treatments based on disease rarity in China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.