José Luis Pinto Prades

New evidence of preference reversals in health utility measurement

A central assumption in health utility measurement is that preferences are invariant to the elicitation method used. This assumption is challenged by preference reversals. Previous studies have observed preference reversals between choice and matching tasks and between choice and ranking tasks. We present a preference reversal that is entirely derived from choices, the basic primitive of economics and utility theory. The preference reversal was observed in two studies regarding health states after stroke. Both studies involved large representative samples from the Spanish population, interviewed professionally, and face-to-face. Possible explanations for the preference reversal are the anticipation of disappointment and elation in risky choice and the impact of ethical considerations about the value of life.

From representing views to representativeness of views: Illustrating a new (Q2S) approach in the context of health care priority setting in nine European countries

Governments across Europe are required to make decisions about how best to allocate scarce health care resources. There are legitimate arguments for eliciting societal vales in relation to health care resource allocation given the roles of the general public as payers and potential patients. However, relatively little is known about the views of the general public on general principles which could guide these decisions. In this paper we present five societal viewpoints on principles for health care resources allocation and develop a new approach, Q2S, designed to investigate the extent to which these views are held across a range of European countries. An online survey was developed, based on a previously completed study Q methodology, and delivered between November 2009 and February 2010 across nine countries to 33,515 respondents. The largest proportion of our respondents (44%), were found to most associate themselves with an egalitarian perspective. Differences in views were more strongly associated with countries than with socio-demographic characteristics. These results provide information which could be useful for decision makers in understanding the pluralistic context in which they are making health care resource allocation decisions and how different groups in society may respond to such decisions.