IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/hecopl/v17y2022i4p428-443_5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

If you were a policymaker, which treatment would you disinvest? A participatory value evaluation on public preferences for active disinvestment of health care interventions in the Netherlands

Author

Listed:
  • Rotteveel, A. H.
  • Lambooij, M. S.
  • Over, E. A. B.
  • Hernández, J. I.
  • Suijkerbuijk, A. W. M.
  • de Blaeij, A. T.
  • de Wit, G. A.
  • Mouter, N.

Abstract

Introduction Currently, it is not known what attributes of health care interventions citizens consider important in disinvestment decision-making (i.e. decisions to discontinue reimbursement). Therefore, this study aims to investigate the preferences of citizens of the Netherlands toward the relative importance of attributes of health care interventions in the context of disinvestment. Methods A participatory value evaluation (PVE) was conducted in April and May 2020. In this PVE, 1143 Dutch citizens were asked to save at least €100 million by selecting health care interventions for disinvestment from a list of eight unlabeled health care interventions, described solely with attributes. A portfolio choice model was used to analyze participants' choices. Results Participants preferred to disinvest health care interventions resulting in smaller gains in quality of life and life expectancy that are provided to older patient groups. Portfolios (i.e. combinations of health care interventions) resulting in smaller savings were preferred for disinvestment over portfolios with larger savings. Conclusion The disinvestment of health care interventions resulting in smaller health gains and that are targeted at older patient groups is likely to receive most public support. By incorporating this information in the selection of candidate interventions for disinvestment and the communication on disinvestment decisions, policymakers may increase public support for disinvestment.

Suggested Citation

  • Rotteveel, A. H. & Lambooij, M. S. & Over, E. A. B. & Hernández, J. I. & Suijkerbuijk, A. W. M. & de Blaeij, A. T. & de Wit, G. A. & Mouter, N., 2022. "If you were a policymaker, which treatment would you disinvest? A participatory value evaluation on public preferences for active disinvestment of health care interventions in the Netherlands," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(4), pages 428-443, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:17:y:2022:i:4:p:428-443_5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S174413312200010X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bahamonde-Birke, Francisco J. & Geigenmüller, Iris M. & Mouter, Niek & van Lierop, Dea S. & Ettema, Dick F., 2024. "How do I want the city council to spend our budget? Conceiving MaaS from a citizen's perspective … (as well as biking infrastructure and public transport)," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 96-104.
    2. Hernandez, Jose Ignacio & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Chorus, Caspar & Mouter, Niek, 2023. "Data-driven assisted model specification for complex choice experiments data: Association rules learning and random forests for Participatory Value Evaluation experiments," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    3. Boxebeld, Sander & Geijsen, Tom & Tuit, Charlotte & Exel, Job van & Makady, Amr & Maes, Laurence & van Agthoven, Michel & Mouter, Niek, 2024. "Public preferences for the allocation of societal resources over different healthcare purposes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 341(C).
    4. Hössinger, Reinhard & Peer, Stefanie & Juschten, Maria, 2023. "Give citizens a task: An innovative tool to compose policy bundles that reach the climate goal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:17:y:2022:i:4:p:428-443_5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/hep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.