services can be described by their attributes, and that an valuation individual’s of the intervention or service is based on the level of the attributes (Ryan, 2004). Discussion Despite the development of alternative techniques, SG, TTO and the VAS remain the 3 most commonly used methods for eliciting preferences for health states. Out of these 3, health economists recommend the use of the SG and TTO approaches (Brazier et al. 1999). Although the most complex to complete, SG is seen by some as the method of utility elicitation (Drummond, 2005). This is due to its foundation in expected utility theory (EUT) which provides a framework for how individuals make decisions under uncertainty (Von Neumann & Morgenstern, 1944). EUT states that individuals aim to maximise utility, and choose between uncertain outcomes by comparing the expected utility values of these outcomes, multiplied by the probability of receiving the outcome. The existence of both risk and uncertainty in decision making when using SG is said to reflect the risk and uncertainty experienced when receiving health care (Brazier et al. 2007). Others however dispute this, and suggest that SG results violate the axioms of expected utility as individuals responses are also influenced by factors such as risk attitude, gambling effects and loss aversion (Green et al. 2000). For
services can be described by their attributes, and that an individual’s valuation of the intervention or service is based on the level of the attributes (Ryan, 2004). Discussion Despite the development of alternative techniques, SG, TTO and the VAS remain the 3 most commonly used methods for eliciting preferences for health states. Out of these 3, health economists recommend the use of the SG and TTO approaches (Brazier et al. 1999). Although the most complex to complete, SG is seen by some as the method of utility elicitation (Drummond, 2005). This is due to its foundation in expected utility theory (EUT) which provides a framework for how individuals make decisions under uncertainty (Von Neumann & Morgenstern, 1944). EUT states that individuals aim to maximise utility, and choose between uncertain outcomes by comparing the expected utility values of these outcomes, multiplied by the probability of receiving the outcome. The existence of both risk and uncertainty in decision making when using SG is said to reflect the risk and uncertainty experienced when receiving health care (Brazier et al. 2007). Others however dispute this, and suggest that SG results violate the axioms of expected utility as individuals responses are also influenced by factors such as risk attitude, gambling effects and loss aversion (Green et al. 2000). For
VKBrennan%20THESIS%20FINAL%20%28including%20appendix%29.docx