This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Morris, J. Articles by Hammitt, J. K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Morris, J. Articles by Hammitt, J. K. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Using Life Expectancy to Communicate Benefits of Health Care Programs in Contingent Valuation Studies

Center for Risk Analysis, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia

James K. Hammitt, PhD

Center for Risk Analysis, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts

Background. There is growing interest in the use of contingent valuation (CV) to estimate the monetary value of health program benefits. Ideally, CV could be used to value a specific shift in survival curve. However, a shift in survival curve may prove too complex for widespread use in CV instruments. To facilitate the use of CV in valuing longevity benefits, researchers need alternative summary measures that describe the longevity benefit in a single number that is more readily communicated in a CV context. Methods. The authors compare 2 methods for communicating longevity benefits in a CV survey. Random subsamples of respondents valued a longevity benefit expressed either as a continuing reduction in annual mortality risk or as a gain in life expectancy. To compare the validity of the alternative descriptions, the authors evaluate willingness to pay (WTP) estimates for consistency with theoretical predictions. Results. It is found that WTP for a longevity benefit is sensitive to the framing of the benefit, with respondents expressing higher WTP for the benefit expressed as a life expectancy gain. The life expectancy format performs better than the risk reduction format in one important regard—sensitivity to scope of the benefit—and no worse than the risk reduction format in other regards. Conclusion. Expressing longevity benefits in terms of life expectancy appears to hold promise as a method for enhancing the validity of economic evaluation of health care programs.

Key Words: risk communication • contingent valuation • life expectancy • willingness to pay • pneumonia vaccine

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 21, No. 6, 468-478 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0102100605


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Krupnick Mortality-risk Valuation and Age: Stated Preference Evidence Rev Environ Econ Policy, January 1, 2007; 1(2): 261 - 282. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]