Objectives: Health economic analyses that simultaneously address the concerns of increasing population health and reducing health inequalities require information on public preferences for using healthcare resources to reduce health inequalities and how this is valued relative to improving total population health. Previous research has quantified this preference in the form of an inequality aversion parameter in a specified social welfare function. This study aimed to elicit general population's views on health inequality and to estimate an inequality aversion parameter in Uganda.
Methods: Adult respondents from the general population were recruited and interviewed using survey adapted from an existing questionnaire, including trade-off questions between 2 hypothetical healthcare programs. Data on participants' demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and health-related quality of life measured by 5-level version of EQ-5D were collected.
Results: A nationally representative sample of 165 participants were included, with mean age of 37.1 years and mean 5-level version of EQ-5D at 0.836. Most respondents indicated willingness to trade-off some total population health to reduce health inequality. Translating the preferences into an Atkinson inequality aversion parameter (14.70) implies that health gain to the poorest 20% of people should be given approximately 6 times the weight of health gains to the richest 20%.
Conclusions: Our study suggests it is feasible to adapt questionnaires of this type for a Ugandan population and this approach could be used to measure public aversion to health inequality in other settings. The elicited inequality aversion parameter can be used to support the assessment of health inequality impact in economic evaluation in Uganda.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vhri.2022.04.006 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Implications of Diminishing Lifespan Marginal Utility for Valuing Equity in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
MDM Policy Pract
January 2025
Department of Population Health, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Unlabelled: Diminishing marginal lifespan utility (DMLU) implies that a particular lifespan increment (e.g., 1 life-year) confers lesser marginal utility if added to longer lifespans (e.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFA Parsimonious Approach to Remediate Concerns about QALY-Based Discrimination.
Med Decis Making
February 2025
NYU Langone, New York, NY, USA.
Important barriers to the use of QALYs in the United States include concerns about disability and age discrimination.Modifications to the utility function underlying QALYs have been proposed to mitigate these concerns, but some find them challenging to consider and/or to apply.Unrelated to these concerns, QALYs have been adapted within the framework of distributional cost-effectiveness analysis to allow consideration of inequality as well as efficiency.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFNeural mechanisms of fairness decision-making: An EEG comparative study on opportunity equity and outcome equity.
Neuroimage
January 2025
Institute of Brain Science, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, 311121, China; Department of Psychology, Jing Hengyi School of Education, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, 311121, China; Zhejiang Philosophy and Social Science Laboratory for Research in Early Development and Childcare, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, 311121, China. Electronic address:
Social equity consists of opportunity equity and outcome equity, where outcome equity refers to the equitable distribution of resource, while opportunity equity refers to equivalent sets of opportunities to obtain a satisfactory outcome, ensuring equality in expected payoffs rather than the actual payoffs. Previous studies showed the existence of inequity aversion for opportunity inequality and identified some differences between opportunity equity and outcome equity in the behavior pattern of evaluation and reaction processes. However, the commonalities and distinctions in brain activity during the fairness decision-making of opportunity equity and outcome equity remain unclear.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFDetailed analysis of drift diffusion model parameters estimated for the ultimatum game.
Neurosci Res
December 2024
Center for Information and Neural Networks, NICT, 1-4 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan; Graduate School of Frontier Biosciences, Osaka University, 1-3 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan. Electronic address:
Bargaining is fundamental in human social interactions and often studied using the ultimatum game, where a proposer offers a division of resources, and the responder decides whether to accept or reject it. If accepted, the resources are divided as proposed, but neither party receives anything otherwise. While previous research has typically focused on either the choice or response time, a computational approach that integrates both can provide deeper insights into the cognitive and neural processes involved.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFNo evidence for inequity aversion in non-human animals: a meta-analysis of accept/reject paradigms.
Proc Biol Sci
November 2024
Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Disadvantageous inequity aversion (IA), a negative response to receiving less than others, is a key building block of the human sense of fairness. While some theorize that IA is shared by species across the animal kingdom, others argue that it is an exclusively human evolutionary adaptation to the selective pressures of cooperation among non-kin. Essential to this debate is the empirical question of whether non-human animals are averse towards unequal resource distributions.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!