Individual Utilities Are Inconsistent with Rationing Choices

Peter A. Ubel, George Loewenstein, Dennis Scanlon and Mark Kamlet

Medical Decision Making, 1996, vol. 16, issue 2, 108-116

Abstract: Objective . To test whether cost-effectiveness analysis and present methods of elic iting health condition "utilities" capture the public's values for health care rationing. Design. Two surveys of economics students. The first survey measured their utilities for three states of health, using either analog scale, standard gamble, or time tradeoff. The second survey measured their preferences, in paired rationing choices of the health states from the first survey and also compared with treatment of acutely fatal appendicitis. The rationing choices each subject faced were individualized according to his or her utility responses, so that the subject should have been indifferent between the two conditions in each rationing choice. Results. The analog-scale elicitation method produced significantly lower utilities than the time-tradeoff and standard-gam ble methods for two of the three conditions (p

Date: 1996
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (32)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X9601600202 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:16:y:1996:i:2:p:108-116

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9601600202

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().