IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v39y1994i1p7-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost utility analysis: What should be measured?

Author

Listed:
  • Richardson, J.

Abstract

The paper re-examines the issue of the appropriate unit for measuring output in cost utility analysis and the technique that will measure it. There are two main themes. The first is that utility, as it is often conceived and quantified, is not an appropriate basis for measurement. Consequently, a question arises concerning the selection of an appropriate unit of measurement. The second theme is that there is a need to establish criteria for the evaluation of measurement units. Four criteria are proposed which follow from commonly accepted social objectives and from the requirements of a measurement unit. It is concluded that, as judged by these criteria, the measurement units produced by the time trade-off and person trade-off (equivalence) techniques are more satisfactory than the units produced by the rating scale, magnitude estimation or the standard gamble.

Suggested Citation

  • Richardson, J., 1994. "Cost utility analysis: What should be measured?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 7-21, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:39:y:1994:i:1:p:7-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(94)90162-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:eee:socmed:v:39:y:1994:i:1:p:7-21. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.