Can Independently Elicited Adult- and Child-Perspective Health-State Utilities Explain Priority Setting?

OBJECTIVES: Time trade-off (TTO) utilities for EQ-5D-Y-3L health states valued by adults taking a child's perspective are generally higher than their valuations of the same state for themselves. Ceteris paribus, the use of these utilities in economic evaluation implies that children gain less from treatments returning them to full health for a specified amount of time than adults. In this study, we explore if this implication affects individuals' views of priority-setting choices between treatments for adults and children. METHODS: We elicited TTO utilities for 4 health states in online interviews, in which respondents valued states for a 10-year-old child and another adult their age. Views on priority setting were studied with person trade-off (PTO) tasks involving the same health states. We tested the ability of the subjects' TTO utilities to predict these societal choices in PTO. RESULTS: There are no significant differences between adult and child health state valuations in our study, but we do observe a substantial preference for treating children over adults in the PTO task. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that perspective-dependent health-state utilities only explain a small part of views on priority setting between adults and children. External equity weights might be useful to better explain the higher priority given to children.

The effect of duration and time preference on the gap between adult and child health state valuations in time trade-off.

Composite time trade-off (cTTO) utilities have been found to be higher when adults value health states for children than for themselves. It is not clear if these differences reflect adults assigning truly higher utilities to the same health state in different perspectives, or if they are caused by other factors, which are not accounted for in the valuation procedure. We test if the difference between children's and adults' cTTO valuations changes if a longer duration than the standard 10 years is used. Personal interviews with a representative sample of 151 adults in the UK were conducted. We employed the cTTO method to estimate utilities of four different health states, where adults considered states both from their own and a 10-year-old child's perspective, for durations of 10 and 20 years. We corrected the cTTO valuations for perspective-specific time preferences in a separate task, again for both perspectives. We replicate the finding that cTTO utilities are higher for the child perspective than for the adult perspective, although the difference is only significant when controlling for other variables in a mixed effects regression. Time preferences are close to 0 on average, and smaller for children than adults. After correcting TTO utilities for time preferences, the effect of perspective is no longer significant. No differences were found for cTTO tasks completed with a 10- or 20-year duration. Our results suggest that the child-adult gap is partially related to differences in time preferences and, hence, that correcting cTTO utilities for these preferences could be useful.

Jumping the Queue:Willingness to Pay for Faster Access to COVID-19 Vaccines in Seven European Countries.

INTRODUCTION: Given the initial shortage of vaccines to protect against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many countries set up priority lists, implying that large parts of the population had to wait. We therefore elicited the willingness to pay (WTP) for access to two hypothetical COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: Respondents were asked how much they would be willing to pay to get an immediate COVID-19 vaccination rather than waiting for one through the public system. We report data collected in January/February 2021 from the European COVID Survey (ECOS) comprising representative samples of the population in Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, the Netherlands, and the UK (N = 7068). RESULTS: In total, 73% (68.5%) of respondents were willing to pay for immediate access to a 100% (60%) effective vaccine, ranging from 66.4% (59.4%) in the Netherlands to 83.3% (81.1%) in Portugal. We found a mean WTP of 54.36 euros (median 37 euros) for immediate access to the 100% effective COVID-19 vaccine and 43.83 euros (median 31 euros) for the 60% effective vaccine. The vaccines' effectiveness, respondents' age, country of residence, income, health state and well-being were significant determinants of WTP. Willingness to be vaccinated (WTV) was also strongly associated with WTP, with lower WTV being associated with lower WTP. A higher perceived risk of infection, higher health risk, more trust in the safety of vaccines, and higher expected waiting time for the free vaccination were all associated with a higher WTP. CONCLUSION: We find that most respondents would have been willing to pay for faster access to COVID vaccines (jumping the queue), suggesting welfare gains from quicker access to these vaccines. This is an important result in light of potential future outbreaks and vaccines.

An experimental investigation of social risk preferences for health.

In this paper, we use the risk apportionment technique of Eeckhoudt, Rey and Schlesinger (2007) to study higher order risk preferences for others' health as well as ex-ante and ex-post inequality preferences for social risky distributions, and their interaction. In an experiment on a sample of university students acting as impartial spectators, we observe risk aversion towards social health losses and a dislike of ex-ante inequality. In addition, evidence for ex-post inequality seeking is much weaker than evidence for ex-ante inequality aversion. Because ex-ante inequality aversion is unrelated to risk aversion, we conclude that simple forms of utilitarianism are not relevant for individual judgment of social risk over health. Last, our investigation of precautionary distribution, which would occur when one particular group in the society suffers from background health risk, shows substantial polarization of preferences. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11238-023-09928-w.

Decomposing social risk preferences for health and wealth.

This study reports the results of the first artefactual field experiment designed to measure the prevalence of aversion toward different components of social risks in a large and demographically representative sample. We identify social risk preferences for health and wealth for losses and gains, and decompose these attitudes into four different dimensions: individual risk, collective risk, ex-post inequality, and ex-ante inequality. The results of a non-parametric analysis suggest that aversion to risk and inequality is the mean preference for outcomes in health and wealth in the domain of gains and losses. A parametric decomposition of aversion to risk and inequality shows that respondents are averse to ex-post and ex-ante inequality in health and wealth for gains and losses. Likewise, respondents are averse to collective risk, but neutral to individual risk, which highlights the importance of considering different components of social risk preferences when managing social health and wealth risks.

The formation of physician altruism.

We study how patient-regarding altruism is formed by medical education. We elicit and structurally estimate altruistic preferences using experimental data from a large sample of medical students (N = 733) in Germany at different progress stages in their studies. The estimates reveal substantial heterogeneity in altruistic preferences of medical students. Patient-regarding altruism is highest for freshmen, significantly declines for students in the course of medical studies, and tends to increase again for last year students, who assist in clinical practice. Also, patient-regarding altruism is higher for females and positively associated to general altruism. Altruistic medical students have gained prior practical experience in healthcare, have lower income expectations, and are more likely to choose surgery and pediatrics as their preferred specialty.

Time and lexicographic preferences in the valuation of EQ-5D-Y with time trade-off methodology.

In the valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L, adult respondents are asked to complete composite time trade-off (cTTO) tasks for a 10-year-old child. Earlier work has shown that cTTO utilities elicited in such a child perspective are generally higher than when adults take their own perspective. We explore how differences in time preference in child and adult perspectives could explain this effect. Furthermore, as cTTO valuation in a child perspective involves explicit consideration of immediate death for a child, we also consider how cTTO utilities could be affected by decision-makers lexicographically avoiding death in children. We report the results of an experiment in which 219 respondents valued 5 health states in both adult and child perspectives with either a standard cTTO or a lead-time TTO only approach, in which immediate death is less focal. Time preferences were measured in both perspectives. Our results suggest that utilities were lower when lead-time TTO, rather than cTTO, was used. We find large heterogeneity in time preference in both perspectives, with predominantly negative time preference. The influence of time preferences on utilities, however, was small, and correcting for time preferences did not reduce differences between utilities elicited in both perspectives. Surprisingly, we found more evidence for differences in utilities between adult and child perspectives when lead-time TTO was used. Overall, these results suggest that time and lexicographic preferences affect time trade-off valuation in child and adult perspectives, but are not the explanation for differences between these perspectives. We discuss the implications of our findings for EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation.

Reference-dependent age weighting of quality-adjusted life years.

People do not only care about maximizing health gains but also about their distribution. For example, they give more weight to younger patients than older patients. This pilot study aims to investigate if age weighting is reinforced by loss aversion if young people are falling behind one's perceived 'normal' quality of life (QoL), while older people do not. We apply a person trade-off method in a large representative sample (n = 990) to estimate age weighting factors. We also measure QoL levels that individuals regard as 'normal' for different ages, serving as reference points. We observe a considerable amount of age weighting, with 20-year-old patients on average receiving 1.7 times as much weight as 80-year-old patients. Perceived 'normal' QoL rapidly decreases with age of a patient. Older people are more optimistic about what constitutes 'normal QoL' than younger people, but they express a faster decline in normal QoL due to aging. Respondents who view all improvements to be gain enlarging show the least age weighting, but loss aversion cannot explain the results. Still, one's age-related reference level is an important predictor of age weights. Given the explorative nature of this study, further studies are called for to generate more robust evidence.

The Role of Perceived Utility of Full Health in Age Weighting.

OBJECTIVES: People often give different weights to quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained by different socioeconomic groups. It is well known that QALY gains of younger patients generally get more weight than the same QALY gains accruing to older patients. This study aims to separate these age-related preferences into "pure age weighting" and age weighting caused by full health not perceived as being the same for the old as for the young. METHODS: We apply a person trade-off method in a large sample representative (N = 500) of the Dutch general adult population to estimate age weighting factors. We describe health as a percentage of what is considered full health for a given age, for which we obtain a proxy in a separate task. RESULTS: A high amount of age weighting is observed, with QALYs to 20-year-old patients receiving approximately 1.5 times as much weight as QALYs to 80-year-old patients. At the same time, we see that individuals do not perceive full health to be the same for young and older people. In fact, the age weighting disappears once we control for these differences in full health perceptions. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents had strong preferences for the young relative to the old, but these preferences were related to full health perceptions, that is, more weight being assigned to younger because full health is at a higher absolute level for them than for the old.

Correcting for discounting and loss aversion in composite time trade-off.

Time trade-off utilities have been suggested to be biased upwards. This bias is a result of the method being applied assuming linear utility of life duration, which is violated when individuals discount future life years or are loss averse for health. Applying a "corrective approach", that is, measuring individuals' discount function and loss aversion and correcting time trade-off utilities for these individual characteristics, may reduce this bias in utilities. Earlier work has developed this approach for time trade-off in a student sample. In this study, the corrective approach was extended to composite time trade-off (cTTO) methodology, which enabled correcting utilities for health states worse than dead. In digital interviews a sample of 150 members of the general public completed cTTO tasks for six health states, and afterward they completed measurements of loss aversion and discounting. cTTO utilities were corrected using these measurements under multiple specifications. Respondents were also asked to reflect on and adjust their cTTO utilities directly. Our results show considerable loss aversion and both positive and negative discounting were prevalent. As predicted, correction generally resulted in lower utilities. This was in accordance with the direction of adjustments made by respondents themselves.

Eliciting risk preferences that predict risky health behavior: A comparison of two approaches.

Information on attitudes to risk could increase understanding of and explain risky health behaviors. We investigate two approaches to eliciting risk preferences in the health domain, a novel "indirect" lottery elicitation approach with health states as outcomes and a "direct" approach where respondents are asked directly about their willingness to take risks. We compare the ability of the two approaches to predict health-related risky behaviors in a general adult population. We also investigate a potential framing effect in the indirect lottery elicitation approach. We find that risk preferences elicited using the direct approach can better predict health-related risky behavior than those elicited using the indirect approach. Moreover, a seemingly innocuous change to the framing of the lottery question results in significantly different risk preference estimates, and conflicting conclusions about the ability of the indicators to predict risky health behaviors.

Do patients and other stakeholders value health service quality equally? A prospect theory based choice experiment in cataract care.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare the valuation of health service quality by patients and other stakeholders through a case study in cataract care. METHODS: The valuation of health service quality by Dutch patients, ophthalmologists and healthcare purchasers involved in cataract care are elicited by a prospect theory-based measurement task. Respondents stated preferences for probabilities and scores for the clinical indicator Complication (posterior capsular rupture with vitreous loss) and the patient-reported experience measure Information Provisioning (the ophthalmologist provides sufficient information about risks of cataract surgery to the patient). Our subject pool (n = 256) consisted of 90 ophthalmologists, 125 cataract patients, and 41 healthcare purchasers employed by health insurance companies. RESULTS: Following prospect theory, respondents were loss averse, and risk averse for gains. However, utilities differed from prospect theory, especially the concave utility for losses. Patients were significantly more loss averse than the other respondents, more subject to a pessimistic view on losses, and had significantly more concave utility for losses, especially for the clinical quality indicator Complications. For each of the stakeholders, the results differed significantly between the two essentially different quality indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneous valuations of patients and other stakeholders invalidate commonly applied cataract care quality assessment frameworks. Incorporating loss aversion, pessimism and concave utility for losses can remedy existing shortcomings. The valuation differences between patients and other stakeholders emphasize the need for communication and shared decision making in patient-centered treatment, purchasing and policy.

Altruism and the Link to Pro-social Pandemic Behavior.

In the Corona pandemic, especially in the phase before vaccines were available, people's risk of infection with COVID-19 was dependent on the adherence to pandemic behaviors (e. g., wearing masks) of others around them. To explore whether altruistic individuals are more likely to engage in pro-social behaviors to protect others during the pandemic, we use data from the European COVID Survey (ECOS). The data was collected in September 2020 and consisted of a representative sample from seven European countries (N = 7,025). Altruism was measured as a deviation from purely self-interested behavior by asking respondents how much they would be willing to donate from an unexpected gain to the equivalent of 1000€. Respondents who were willing to donate more than 0 Euros (68.7%) were treated as altruistic; on average, respondents were willing to donate 11.7% (SD 17.9) of the gain. Controlling for country, sociodemographics, general risk aversion and COVID-specific risk aversion, we find that individuals classified as altruistic were more likely to behave pro-socially. More specifically, we find that altruistic respondents were more likely to wait at home for test results and wear a mask where it is recommended. They would also stay about 1 day longer under quarantine without symptoms after visiting a high-risk country and were less likely to go to a supermarket with COVID symptoms. We find no significant effect for wearing a mask in places where it is mandatory and for inviting more than six people into the house. Furthermore, we find that the subjective risk assessment of COVID-19 also plays a role in these behaviors. Our results support evidence from the literature that suggests that adherence to pro-social pandemic behaviors may be increased if public health officials emphasize the altruistic nature of these behaviors.

Multivariate risk preferences in the quality-adjusted life year model.

The interest in multivariate and higher-order risk preferences has increased. A growing body of literature has demonstrated the relevance and impact of these preferences, but for health the evidence is lacking. We measure multivariate and higher-order risk preferences for quality of life (QoL) and longevity, the two attributes of the Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) model. We observe preferences for a positive correlation between these attributes and for pooling together a fixed loss in one of the attributes and a mean-zero risk in the other, and for pooling together mean-zero risks in QoL and longevity. The findings indicate that higher-order risk preferences are stronger for health than for money. Furthermore, we test if preferences for a risky treatment for a disease affecting only QoL, depend on life expectancy. We find no such a relation, but there is a positive relation between riskiness of a comorbidity affecting life expectancy and risk aversion for a QoL treatment. We therefore observe no definitive deviation from the QALY model, although the model is more robust when expected longevity is high. Our findings suggest that the current practice of cost-effectiveness analysis should be generalized to account for risk aversion in QoL and longevity, and higher-order preferences.

Life satisfaction: The role of domain-specific reference points.

In the evaluation of well-being, it is not only important what people have in absolute terms, but also how this compares to reference points in relative terms. We explore the relevance of relative comparisons by testing the effect of people's self-rated position on potential reference points for income and health on their subjective well-being. We used Multiple Discrepancies Theory as a framework to identify seven potentially relevant reference points for income and health. A representative sample (N = 550) of the Netherlands assessed their income and health relative to these reference points. In addition, we elicited monthly household income, health status (EQ-5D-5L), and subjective well-being (SWLS). In line with the literature, we found a negative convex relationship between subjective well-being and age and a positive relationship with being employed, income, and health. For income, subjective well-being was also associated with how current income compared to respondents' needs and progression over time, and for health especially with how current health compared to what they felt they deserved. Our findings suggest that income and health are important for subjective well-being both in absolute and relative terms. We found negative effects on life satisfaction if some of the domain specific reference points were not met.

Trust me; I know what I am doing investigating the effect of choice list elicitation and domain-relevant training on preference reversals in decision making for others.

One core assumption of standard economic theory is that an individual's preferences are stable, irrespective of the method used to elicit them. This assumption may be violated if preference reversals are observed when comparing different methods to elicit people's preferences. People may then prefer A over B using one method while preferring B over A using another. Such preference reversals pose a significant problem for theoretical and applied research. We used a sample of medical and economics students to investigate preference reversals in the health and financial domain when choosing patients/clients. We explored whether preference reversals are associated with domain-relevant training and tested whether using guided 'choice list' elicitation reduces reversals. Our findings suggest that preference reversals were more likely to occur for medical students, within the health domain, and for open-ended valuation questions. Familiarity with a domain reduced the likelihood of preference reversals in that domain. Although preference reversals occur less frequently within specialist domains, they remain a significant theoretical and practical problem. The use of clearer valuation procedures offers a promising approach to reduce preference reversals.

Beliefs and Risk Perceptions About COVID-19: Evidence From Two Successive French Representative Surveys During Lockdown.

BACKGROUND: The outbreak of COVID-19 has been a major interrupting event, challenging how societies and individuals deal with risk. An essential determinant of the virus' spread is a series of individual decisions, such as wearing face masks in public space. Those decisions depend on trade-offs between costs (or benefits) and risks, and beliefs are key to explain these. METHODS: We elicit beliefs about the COVID-19 pandemic during lockdown in France by means of surveys asking French citizens about their belief of the infection fatality ratio (IFR) for COVID-19, own risk to catch the disease, risk as perceived by others, and expected prevalence rate. Those self-assessments were measured twice during lockdown: about 2 weeks after lockdown started and about 2 weeks before lockdown ended. We also measured the quality of these beliefs with respect to available evidence at the time of the surveys, allowing us to assess the calibration of beliefs based on risk-related socio-demographics. Finally, comparing own risk to expected prevalence rates in the two successive surveys provides a dynamic view of comparative optimism with respect to the disease. RESULTS: The risk perceptions are rather high in absolute terms and they increased between the two surveys. We found no evidence for an impact of personal experience with COVID-19 on beliefs and lower risk perceptions of the IFR when someone in the respondent's family has been diagnosed with a disease. Answers to survey 1 confirmed this pattern with a clear indication that respondents were optimistic about their chances to catch COVID-19. However, in survey 2, respondents revealed comparative pessimism. CONCLUSION: The results show that respondents overestimated the probabilities to catch or die from COVID-19, which is not unusual and does not necessarily reflect a strong deviation from rational behavior. While a rational model explains why the own risk to catch COVID-19 rose between the two surveys, it does not explain why the subjective assessment of the IFR remained stable. The comparative pessimism in survey 2 was likely due to a concomitant increase in the respondents' perceived chances to catch the disease and a decreased expected prevalence rate.

What is it going to be, TTO or SG? A direct test of the validity of health state valuation.

Standard gamble (SG) typically yields higher health state valuations than time trade-off (TTO), which may be caused by biases affecting both methods. It has been suggested that TTO yields more accurate health state valuations, because TTO is subject to both upward and downward biases that may cancel out. Verifying this claim, however, would require a golden standard to test validity against. In this study, we attempted to provide a first direct test of the validity of health state valuation. A total of 119 students completed five TTO and SG tasks. Afterwards, their health state valuations elicited with TTO and SG were shown to them in an interactive graph. Respondents were asked to indicate which of the methods represented their valuation of a health state best. They could also adjust their valuation. Overall, we found that respondents indicated that TTO valuations better reflected health state valuations, a result that was more pronounced for more severe health states. When offered the opportunity, on average, respondents adjusted health state valuations downwards. These findings may have implications for future work on (bias correction in) health state valuations.