Disability discrimination and misdirected criticism of the quality-adjusted life year framework

Whose values should count - those of patients or the general public - when adopting the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) framework for healthcare decision making is a long-standing debate. Specific disciplines, such as economics, are not wedded to a particular side of the debate, and arguments for...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Whitehurst, G. T. (Author) ; Engel, Lidia (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2018
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2018, Volume: 44, Issue: 11, Pages: 793-795
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 181615900X
003 DE-627
005 20230428063507.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220908s2018 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/medethics-2016-104066  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)181615900X 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP181615900X 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Whitehurst, G. T.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Disability discrimination and misdirected criticism of the quality-adjusted life year framework 
264 1 |c 2018 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Whose values should count - those of patients or the general public - when adopting the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) framework for healthcare decision making is a long-standing debate. Specific disciplines, such as economics, are not wedded to a particular side of the debate, and arguments for and against the use of patient values have been discussed at length in the literature. In 2012, Sinclair proposed an approach, grounded within patient preference theory, which sought to avoid a perceived unfair discrimination against people with disabilities when using values from the general public. Key assumptions about general public values that beget this line of thinking were that ‘disabled states always tally with lower quality of life’, and the use of standardised instruments means that ‘you are forced into a fixed view of disability as a lower value state’ (Sinclair, 2012). Drawing on recent contributions to the health economics literature, we contend that such assumptions are not inherent to the incorporation of general public values for the estimation of QALYs. In practice, whether health states of people with disabilities are of ‘lower value’ is, to some extent, a reflection of the health state descriptions that members of the public are asked to value. 
700 1 |a Engel, Lidia  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 44(2018), 11, Seite 793-795  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)323607802  |w (DE-600)2026397-1  |w (DE-576)260773972  |x 1473-4257  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:44  |g year:2018  |g number:11  |g pages:793-795 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/26879852  |x JSTOR 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2016-104066  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/44/11/793.abstract  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 418561294X 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 181615900X 
LOK |0 005 20220908053728 
LOK |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-03#F02BB6D939FB1A061A73CFB37D05E57582E4436F 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/26879852 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
OAS |a 1  |b inherited from superior work 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw