计算和贴现获得了生命年。

J Søgaard, D Gyrd-Hansen
{"title":"计算和贴现获得了生命年。","authors":"J Søgaard,&nbsp;D Gyrd-Hansen","doi":"10.1007/978-1-4615-5681-7_3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The life expectancy gain produced by a reduction in mortality can be determined by three different methods with respect to the timing of the gained life-years. One method adds the life expectancy gain to the expected end of life. Another method places the gain at the time of occurrence of the mortality reduction. A third method distributes the gained life-years over the maximum lifespan according to the differences in survival probabilities after and before the reduction in mortality. The three methods are all used in the literature together with a quasi-deterministic and a probabilistic approach to the notion of life expectancy. The counted numbers of gained life-years are the same, but due to different timing of life expectancy gains the discounted numbers are different. Several discounting models are identified when combining the three methods of counting with the deterministic and the probabilistic approaches to life expectancy. Some are symmetrical, some are not. However, most importantly, they come out with potentially very large differences in the discounted number of gained life-years. They differ by a factor of approximately (1 + r)e(a)-1, where r is a constant discount rate and e(a) is remaining life expectancy at age a, when the reduction of mortality occurs. For a new-born, discounting at 7% p.a., one discounting model provides a present value that is 150 times larger than another discounting model, the other models being in between. The various counting and discounting models for life expectancy gains are presented formally, graphically, and with numerical examples using Danish male mortality data. We show how three different discounting models provide large differences in discounted life expectancy gains and hence cost-effectiveness ratios in an economic evaluation of a colorectal cancer screening programme in Denmark. These different discounting models co-exist in the evaluation literature. Choice of method is rarely made explicit. Sensitivity analysis with respect to this choice is even rarer. We argue that one counting-discounting model is sufficient and that this should be to discount the differences between the two survival probability curves.</p>","PeriodicalId":79866,"journal":{"name":"Developments in health economics and public policy","volume":"6 ","pages":"51-74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Counting and discounting gained life-years.\",\"authors\":\"J Søgaard,&nbsp;D Gyrd-Hansen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/978-1-4615-5681-7_3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The life expectancy gain produced by a reduction in mortality can be determined by three different methods with respect to the timing of the gained life-years. One method adds the life expectancy gain to the expected end of life. Another method places the gain at the time of occurrence of the mortality reduction. A third method distributes the gained life-years over the maximum lifespan according to the differences in survival probabilities after and before the reduction in mortality. The three methods are all used in the literature together with a quasi-deterministic and a probabilistic approach to the notion of life expectancy. The counted numbers of gained life-years are the same, but due to different timing of life expectancy gains the discounted numbers are different. Several discounting models are identified when combining the three methods of counting with the deterministic and the probabilistic approaches to life expectancy. Some are symmetrical, some are not. However, most importantly, they come out with potentially very large differences in the discounted number of gained life-years. They differ by a factor of approximately (1 + r)e(a)-1, where r is a constant discount rate and e(a) is remaining life expectancy at age a, when the reduction of mortality occurs. For a new-born, discounting at 7% p.a., one discounting model provides a present value that is 150 times larger than another discounting model, the other models being in between. The various counting and discounting models for life expectancy gains are presented formally, graphically, and with numerical examples using Danish male mortality data. We show how three different discounting models provide large differences in discounted life expectancy gains and hence cost-effectiveness ratios in an economic evaluation of a colorectal cancer screening programme in Denmark. These different discounting models co-exist in the evaluation literature. Choice of method is rarely made explicit. Sensitivity analysis with respect to this choice is even rarer. We argue that one counting-discounting model is sufficient and that this should be to discount the differences between the two survival probability curves.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79866,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Developments in health economics and public policy\",\"volume\":\"6 \",\"pages\":\"51-74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1998-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Developments in health economics and public policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5681-7_3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developments in health economics and public policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5681-7_3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

死亡率降低所带来的预期寿命增加可以通过三种不同的方法来确定,这些方法与增加的生命年的时间有关。一种方法是将预期寿命增加到预期寿命结束。另一种方法将收益置于死亡率下降发生的时间。第三种方法是根据死亡率降低前后的生存概率差异,将增加的寿命年数分配到最大寿命上。在文献中,这三种方法都与准确定性和概率方法一起用于预期寿命的概念。计算的增加寿命年数是相同的,但由于预期寿命增加的时间不同,贴现的数字是不同的。将三种计算方法与确定性和概率方法相结合,确定了几种折现模型。有些是对称的,有些不是。然而,最重要的是,它们在获得的寿命年折算数上可能有很大的差异。它们的差异约为(1 + r)e(a)-1,其中r是常数贴现率,e(a)是死亡率下降时a岁时的剩余预期寿命。对于新成立的公司,按年7%折现,一个折现模型提供的现值是另一个折现模型的150倍,其他折现模型介于两者之间。用丹麦男性死亡率数据正式、图解地介绍了预期寿命增长的各种计数和贴现模型,并附有数值例子。我们展示了三种不同的贴现模型如何在丹麦结肠直肠癌筛查项目的经济评估中提供预期寿命的贴现收益和成本-效果比的巨大差异。这些不同的贴现模型在评价文献中并存。方法的选择很少明确。关于这种选择的敏感性分析就更少了。我们认为,一个计数-贴现模型是足够的,这应该是贴现两个生存概率曲线之间的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Counting and discounting gained life-years.

The life expectancy gain produced by a reduction in mortality can be determined by three different methods with respect to the timing of the gained life-years. One method adds the life expectancy gain to the expected end of life. Another method places the gain at the time of occurrence of the mortality reduction. A third method distributes the gained life-years over the maximum lifespan according to the differences in survival probabilities after and before the reduction in mortality. The three methods are all used in the literature together with a quasi-deterministic and a probabilistic approach to the notion of life expectancy. The counted numbers of gained life-years are the same, but due to different timing of life expectancy gains the discounted numbers are different. Several discounting models are identified when combining the three methods of counting with the deterministic and the probabilistic approaches to life expectancy. Some are symmetrical, some are not. However, most importantly, they come out with potentially very large differences in the discounted number of gained life-years. They differ by a factor of approximately (1 + r)e(a)-1, where r is a constant discount rate and e(a) is remaining life expectancy at age a, when the reduction of mortality occurs. For a new-born, discounting at 7% p.a., one discounting model provides a present value that is 150 times larger than another discounting model, the other models being in between. The various counting and discounting models for life expectancy gains are presented formally, graphically, and with numerical examples using Danish male mortality data. We show how three different discounting models provide large differences in discounted life expectancy gains and hence cost-effectiveness ratios in an economic evaluation of a colorectal cancer screening programme in Denmark. These different discounting models co-exist in the evaluation literature. Choice of method is rarely made explicit. Sensitivity analysis with respect to this choice is even rarer. We argue that one counting-discounting model is sufficient and that this should be to discount the differences between the two survival probability curves.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信