Tiantian Tao, Junni Du, Yuyang Sun, Xin Li, Pingyu Chen
{"title":"健康结果和金钱之间的时间折扣是否具有特定领域:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Tiantian Tao, Junni Du, Yuyang Sun, Xin Li, Pingyu Chen","doi":"10.1007/s11096-024-01846-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Temporal discounting, the preference for immediate over delayed rewards, affects decision-making in domains like health and finance. Understanding the differences in how people discount health outcomes compared to monetary rewards is crucial to shaping health policy and technology assessments.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare temporal discounting parameters between health outcomes and monetary rewards and evaluate their overall relationship.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to December 2023. Standardized mean differences (SMD) assessed discounting differences between statistical indicators, and correlation coefficients were transformed into Fisher's Z scores. Subgroup analyses based on population, tradability, magnitude, sign, and experimental process explored potential heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 32 studies were included: 29 studies (47 pairs of health and money) for the comparative meta-analysis and 19 studies (32 pairs) for the correlation meta-analysis. No significant differences were found between health and money discounting, although the individuals were more patient with the health outcomes and more impulsive with the money. In the sign effect subgroup, health discounting for delayed losses was lower than for monetary losses (SMD: - 0.293; 95% CI: - 0.458, - 0.129). The pooled correlation coefficient (r) for all studies was 0.333 (95% CI: 0.283-0.383), indicating a moderate association. In subgroup analysis, when the indicator was the discount rate, the pooled r value for 16 studies was 0.278 (95% CI: 0.231, 0.325).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although no significant statistical differences were found between health and money discounting, a moderate correlation was observed, supporting consistent discount rate settings for health technology assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":13828,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":"31-45"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Whether temporal discounting is domain-specific between health outcomes and money: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Tiantian Tao, Junni Du, Yuyang Sun, Xin Li, Pingyu Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11096-024-01846-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Temporal discounting, the preference for immediate over delayed rewards, affects decision-making in domains like health and finance. Understanding the differences in how people discount health outcomes compared to monetary rewards is crucial to shaping health policy and technology assessments.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare temporal discounting parameters between health outcomes and monetary rewards and evaluate their overall relationship.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to December 2023. Standardized mean differences (SMD) assessed discounting differences between statistical indicators, and correlation coefficients were transformed into Fisher's Z scores. Subgroup analyses based on population, tradability, magnitude, sign, and experimental process explored potential heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 32 studies were included: 29 studies (47 pairs of health and money) for the comparative meta-analysis and 19 studies (32 pairs) for the correlation meta-analysis. No significant differences were found between health and money discounting, although the individuals were more patient with the health outcomes and more impulsive with the money. In the sign effect subgroup, health discounting for delayed losses was lower than for monetary losses (SMD: - 0.293; 95% CI: - 0.458, - 0.129). The pooled correlation coefficient (r) for all studies was 0.333 (95% CI: 0.283-0.383), indicating a moderate association. In subgroup analysis, when the indicator was the discount rate, the pooled r value for 16 studies was 0.278 (95% CI: 0.231, 0.325).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although no significant statistical differences were found between health and money discounting, a moderate correlation was observed, supporting consistent discount rate settings for health technology assessments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13828,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"31-45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-024-01846-3\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-024-01846-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Whether temporal discounting is domain-specific between health outcomes and money: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: Temporal discounting, the preference for immediate over delayed rewards, affects decision-making in domains like health and finance. Understanding the differences in how people discount health outcomes compared to monetary rewards is crucial to shaping health policy and technology assessments.
Aim: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare temporal discounting parameters between health outcomes and monetary rewards and evaluate their overall relationship.
Method: Studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to December 2023. Standardized mean differences (SMD) assessed discounting differences between statistical indicators, and correlation coefficients were transformed into Fisher's Z scores. Subgroup analyses based on population, tradability, magnitude, sign, and experimental process explored potential heterogeneity.
Results: A total of 32 studies were included: 29 studies (47 pairs of health and money) for the comparative meta-analysis and 19 studies (32 pairs) for the correlation meta-analysis. No significant differences were found between health and money discounting, although the individuals were more patient with the health outcomes and more impulsive with the money. In the sign effect subgroup, health discounting for delayed losses was lower than for monetary losses (SMD: - 0.293; 95% CI: - 0.458, - 0.129). The pooled correlation coefficient (r) for all studies was 0.333 (95% CI: 0.283-0.383), indicating a moderate association. In subgroup analysis, when the indicator was the discount rate, the pooled r value for 16 studies was 0.278 (95% CI: 0.231, 0.325).
Conclusion: Although no significant statistical differences were found between health and money discounting, a moderate correlation was observed, supporting consistent discount rate settings for health technology assessments.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (IJCP) offers a platform for articles on research in Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Care and related practice-oriented subjects in the pharmaceutical sciences.
IJCP is a bi-monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research data, new ideas and discussions on pharmacotherapy and outcome research, clinical pharmacy, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacoeconomics, the clinical use of medicines, medical devices and laboratory tests, information on medicines and medical devices information, pharmacy services research, medication management, other clinical aspects of pharmacy.
IJCP publishes original Research articles, Review articles , Short research reports, Commentaries, book reviews, and Letters to the Editor.
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy is affiliated with the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP). ESCP promotes practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy, especially in Europe. The general aim of the society is to advance education, practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy .
Until 2010 the journal was called Pharmacy World & Science.