Valuing the ICECAP capability index for older people

Coast, Joanna; Flynn, Terry N.; Natarajan, Lucy; Sproston, Kerry; Lewis, Jane; Louviere, Jordan J.; Peters, Tim J.

doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.05.015

Cited by 435 publications

(536 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

518

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These self‐report measures have focused on capabilities relevant to older people (Coast, Flynn, et al, 2008), women (Greco, Skordis‐Worrall, Mkandawire, & Mills, 2015), and the general adult population (Al‐Janabi, Flynn, & Coast, 2012), and on measures of capability for evaluating interventions in public health (Lorgelly, Lorimer, Fenwick, Briggs, & Anand, 2015), social care (Burge, Netten, & Gallo, 2010), mental health (Simon et al, 2013), pain (Kinghorn, Robinson, & Smith, 2015), and end‐of‐life care (Canaway, Al‐Janabi, Kinghorn, Bailey, & Coast, 2017; Sutton & Coast, 2014). Arguably, the most well‐developed capability measures in terms of their testing and application in the health sector are the ICECAP capability measures (see http://www.icecap.bham.ac.uk).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do capability and functioning differ? A study of U.K. survey responses

Al‐Janabi

2017

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryA core feature of the capability approach is that a person's capabilities (what they are able to do and be in their life) can differ from their functionings (what they actually do and are in their life). However, the degree to which capability and functioning differ in practice is unclear. This paper investigates this issue, focusing on capability and functioning differences (CFD) across different aspects of life and different individuals. In the study, the ICECAP‐A capability questionnaire was modified to measure both functionings and capabilities and was completed by U.K.‐based convenience sample of 943 people. Around one third of people reported CFD in at least one area of their life, most commonly in terms of their “achievement.” People were more likely to report CFD when they had a degree‐level education and when they had impaired health. An additional finding was that capability varied more with education whereas functioning varied more with health status. This finding needs further examination, but it suggests that the choice of evaluative space may influence how priorities are set for public spending.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do capability and functioning differ? A study of U.K. survey responses

Al‐Janabi

2017

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These measures are focused on a wider notion of wellbeing and can be used in economic evaluations. To date, the ICECAP-O (older population) [21], ICECAP-A (adult population) [22], and ICECAP-SCM (supportive care) [23] have been developed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Health and Broader Well-Being Benefits in the Context of Opiate Dependence: The Psychometric Performance of the ICECAP-A and the EQ-5D-5L

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2 Key points What is already known about the topic? Treatments for substance use disorders aim at improving health and, most importantly, broader wellbeing. Health-related measures of quality of life may not adequately capture the broader wellbeing benefits associated with such complex interventions. Comprehensive evidence on the validity and responsiveness of these measures in this context is lacking. When broader capability-wellbeing benefits are expected, NICE recommends the parallel use of an ICECAP measure but their measurement properties in this context are yet unknown. What does the paper add to existing knowledge? This is the first study exploring the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L and ICECAP-A measures in the context of drug addiction. The results indicate that the ICECAP-A is a promising measure for capturing both health and broader wellbeing benefits in this context. 3 ABSTRACT Background:Measuring outcomes in economic evaluations of social care interventions is

show abstract

“…Many of our arguments echo those expounded in Coast et al (2008a) 2 although our application is broader than health interventions and covers interventions that are at 3 the forefront of integrating health and social care. 4…”

Section: Combining Health Benefits 12mentioning

confidence: 70%

“…The focus on 19 health and QALYs seems inappropriate in this context and broader measures of outcomes are 20 required. Sen's (1980) notion of capabilities, which is already gaining ground in the area of health 21 (Coast et al, 2008a, Coast et al, 2008c, could provide a way forward. 22…”

Section: The Outcomes Of Alts 14mentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic evaluation of integrated new technologies for health and social care: Suggestions for policy makers, users and evaluators

Wildman

McMeekin

Grieve

et al. 2016

Social Science & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With an ageing population there is a move towards the use of assisted living technologies (ALTs) to 14 provide social care and health care services, and to improve service processes. These technologies 15 are at the forefront of the integration of health and social care. However, economic evaluations of 16 ALTs, and indeed economic evaluations of any interventions providing both health benefits and 17 benefits beyond health are complex. This paper considers the challenges faced by evaluators and 18 presents a method of economic evaluation for use with interventions where traditional methods 19 may not be suitable for informing funders and decision makers. We propose a method, combining 20 economic evaluation techniques, that can accommodate health outcomes and outcomes beyond 21 health through the use of a common numeraire. Such economic evaluations can benefit both the 22 public and private sector, firstly by ensuring the efficient allocation of resources. And secondly, by 23 providing information for individuals who, in the market for ALTs, face consumption decisions that 24 are infrequent and for which there may be no other sources of information. We consider these 25 issues in the welfarist, extra-welfarist and capabilities framework, which we link to attributes in an 26 individual production model. This approach allows for the valuation of the health component of any 27 such intervention and the valuation of key social care attributes and processes. Finally, we present a 28 2 set of considerations for evaluators highlighting the key issues that need to be considered in this 1 type of economic evaluation. 2

show abstract

Valuing the ICECAP capability index for older people

Cited by 435 publications

References 20 publications

Do capability and functioning differ? A study of U.K. survey responses

Do capability and functioning differ? A study of U.K. survey responses

Measuring Health and Broader Well-Being Benefits in the Context of Opiate Dependence: The Psychometric Performance of the ICECAP-A and the EQ-5D-5L

Economic evaluation of integrated new technologies for health and social care: Suggestions for policy makers, users and evaluators

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About