Abstract
AbstractThe utility weights that are used in published scientific articles for assessing benefits in terms of quality adjusted life-years gained often have a weak theoretical and empirical basis. To a large extent, the weights seem to be used without critical thought and sensible discussion. In a majority of cases, the sensitivity of the results to the weights that have been chosen is not demonstrated, and readers are not provided with information in a way that facilitates independent calculations. This paper calls for a standard for future publications.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Cited by
22 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献