Is an Ounce of Prevention Worth a Pound of Cure? Comparing Demand for Public Prevention and Treatment Policies

Bosworth, Ryan; Cameron, Trudy Ann; DeShazo, J.R.

doi:10.1177/0272989x10371681

Cited by 26 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(46) The reasons for this are unclear, but a likely set of possible explanations includes: (i) respondents may not believe the public programs will benefit them, (ii) respondents may not believe public programs will be effective, or (iii) respondents may focus their attention on the public nature of the program and be less attentive to the benefit to themselves. See also Bosworth et al (47) for a recent discussion of possible reasons why WTP for private risk reductions may be different from public risk reductions.…”

Section: Preliminary Analysis Variable Definitions and Expectationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valuing Mortality Risk Reductions from Environmental, Transport, and Health Policies: A Global Meta‐Analysis of Stated Preference Studies

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We conduct, to our knowledge, the first global meta-analysis (MA) of stated preference (SP) surveys of mortality risk valuation. The surveys ask adults their willingness to pay (WTP) for small reductions in mortality risks, deriving estimates of the sample mean value of statistical life (VSL) for environmental, health, and transport policies. We explain the variation in VSL estimates by differences in the characteristics of the SP methodologies applied, the population affected, and the characteristics of the mortality risks valued, including the magnitude of the risk change. The mean (median) VSL in our full data set of VSL sample means was found to be around $7.4 million (2.4 million) (2005 U.S. dollars). The most important variables explaining the variation in VSL are gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and the magnitude of the risk change valued. According to theory, however, VSL should be independent of the risk change. We discuss and test a range of quality screening criteria in order to investigate the effect of limiting the MA to high-quality studies. When limiting the MA to studies that find statistically significant differences in WTP using external or internal scope tests (without requiring strict proportionality), we find that mean VSL from studies that pass both tests tend to be less sensitive to the magnitude of the risk change. Mean VSL also tends to decrease when stricter screening criteria are applied. For many of our screened models, we find a VSL income elasticity of 0.7-0.9, which is reduced to 0.3-0.4 for some subsets of the data that satisfy scope tests or use the same high-quality survey.

show abstract

Section: Preliminary Analysis Variable Definitions and Expectationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valuing Mortality Risk Reductions from Environmental, Transport, and Health Policies: A Global Meta‐Analysis of Stated Preference Studies

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bulte et al (2005) find that the cause of an environmental problem influences individuals' WTP to fix it. Bosworth et al (2010) report that people are willing to pay more to reduce human mortality via prevention over treatment. Johnston and Duke (2007) test the hypothesis that policy processes are utility-neutral in a DCE on agricultural land preservation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Welfare and Marine Reserves: Is Willingness to Pay for Conservation Dependent on Management Process? A Discrete Choice Experiment of the Ningaloo Marine Park in Australia

Rogers

2013

Canadian J Agri Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The creation of a marine reserve network is an active area of policy in Australia. Here, a discrete choice experiment is used to estimate how the community values the ecology of the Ningaloo Marine Park, with a view to understanding the drivers of social welfare in relation to marine conservation. A novel aspect of this research is that it not only considers the values people hold for conservation outcomes, but also their preferences for how those outcomes are achieved. The results indicate that management process does have an impact on individuals' preferences for conservation. By considering management process within the choice model, we gain a richer understanding of the relationship between social welfare and marine conservation.La création d'un réseau de réserves marines est un secteur de politique actif en Australie. Dans la présenteétude, nous avons utilisé un modèle de choix discrets pour estimer l'importance que la communauté accordeà l'écologie du parc marin de Ningaloo et pour comprendre leséléments du bien-être collectif par rapportà la conservation marine. Cetteétude comporte un nouvel aspect, en ce sens qu'elle ne tient pas compte uniquement de la valeur que la communauté accorde aux résultats de la conservation, mais aussi de leurs préférences quant aux moyens mis en oeuvre pour les obtenir. Les résultats de notreétude indiquent que le processus de gestion a un impact sur les préférences des individus en matière de conservation. Le fait d'inclure le processus de gestion dans le modèle de choix discrets permet de mieux comprendre le lien qui existe entre le bien-être collectif et la conservation marine.

show abstract

“…The question of 'cure' versus treatment has not been widely explored, although there is a large literature exploring treatment (often labeled 'cure' in these studies) versus prevention that may offer some insight [20][21][22][23]. These studies have revealed the relationship between individual and societal preferences for prevention versus treatment.…”

Section: How Much Value?mentioning

confidence: 99%

How do we value a cure?

Husereau

2015

Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Future perceptions of the value of curative therapies will likely reflect debates happening today about preferences for funding of preventive versus treatment programs, as well as funding orphan drugs. Little is known about how society will value curative therapies versus standard treatments, and the significant role of a host of psychological factors compared to overarching concerns about opportunity costs will likely lead to significant tension between payers and the public. More research to clarify societal preferences and healthcare goals in regards to curative therapies and in light of the potential for significant opportunity costs will be required. Given what we know about preferences for the funding of prevention and treatment measures, we should expect that cures will not be held to a different measure.

show abstract

Is an Ounce of Prevention Worth a Pound of Cure? Comparing Demand for Public Prevention and Treatment Policies

Abstract: Preferences for public health policies vary markedly with policy attributes and with individual characteristics. Benefits measurements for welfare assessments of public health policies should be tailored to the type of health threat and the characteristics of the affected population.

Cited by 26 publications

References 37 publications

Valuing Mortality Risk Reductions from Environmental, Transport, and Health Policies: A Global Meta‐Analysis of Stated Preference Studies

Valuing Mortality Risk Reductions from Environmental, Transport, and Health Policies: A Global Meta‐Analysis of Stated Preference Studies

Social Welfare and Marine Reserves: Is Willingness to Pay for Conservation Dependent on Management Process? A Discrete Choice Experiment of the Ningaloo Marine Park in Australia

How do we value a cure?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About