首页> 外文期刊>Social science and medicine >Valuing the benefits and costs of health care programmes: where's the 'extra' in extra-welfarism?
【24h】

Valuing the benefits and costs of health care programmes: where's the 'extra' in extra-welfarism?

机译:重视医疗保健计划的收益和成本:额外福利的“额外”在哪里?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

The application of Sen's notion of capabilities to problems of the allocation of resources to health in the form of an extra-welfarist framework underlies the justification of quality adjusted life years (QALYs) as the method for valuing the benefits of health care. In this paper we critically appraise this application from both conceptual and empirical perspectives. We show that the alleged limitations of the welfarist approach are essentially limitations in its application, not in the capacity of the approach to accommodate the concerns of extra-welfarists. Moreover, the arguments used to justify the application of the extra-welfarist framework are essentially welfarist. We demonstrate that the methods used to measure QALYs share their basic theoretical roots with welfarist valuation methods, such as willingness to pay (WTP). Although QALYs and WTP share many challenges, we argue that WTP provides a method which performs better with respect to those challenges. In the context of evaluating alternative allocations of health care resources we are left asking what is 'extra' in extra-welfarism?
机译:将森的能力概念应用于以福利外框架为形式的卫生资源分配问题的基础,是将质量调整生命年(QALYs)作为评估卫生保健效益的方法的理由。在本文中,我们从概念和实证角度对这一应用进行了严格的评估。我们表明,所谓的福利法的局限性本质上是其应用上的局限性,而不是该方法在满足额外福利者的担忧方面的能力。此外,用来证明采用额外福利主义框架的理由是实质上的福利主义。我们证明,用于衡量QALY的方法与福利评估方法(如支付意愿(WTP))具有其基本的理论渊源。尽管QALY和WTP面临许多挑战,但我们认为WTP提供了一种相对于这些挑战表现更好的方法。在评估医疗保健资源的替代分配的背景下,我们要问的是,额外福利主义中的“额外”是什么?

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号