IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v53y2001i8p1023-1036.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Demand for health care in Denmark: results of a national sample survey using contingent valuation

Author

Listed:
  • Gyldmark, Marlene
  • Morrison, Gwendolyn C.

Abstract

In this paper we use willingness to pay (WTP) to elicit values for private insurance covering treatment for four different health problems. By way of obtaining these values, we test the viability of the contingent valuation method (CVM) and econometric techniques, respectively, as means of eliciting and analysing values from the general public. WTP responses from a Danish national sample survey, which was designed in accordance with existing guidelines, are analysed in terms of consistency and validity checks. Large numbers of zero responses are common in WTP studies, and are found here; therefore, the Heckman selectivity model and log-transformed OLS are employed. The selectivity model is rejected, but test results indicate that the lognormal model yields efficient and unbiased estimates. The results give confidence in the WTP estimates obtained and, more generally, in CVM as a means of valuing publicly provided goods and in econometrics as a tool for analysing WTP results containing many zero responses.

Suggested Citation

  • Gyldmark, Marlene & Morrison, Gwendolyn C., 2001. "Demand for health care in Denmark: results of a national sample survey using contingent valuation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 53(8), pages 1023-1036, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:53:y:2001:i:8:p:1023-1036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(00)00398-1
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    2. Silvia Banfi & Mehdi Farsi & Massimo Filippini, 2009. "An Empirical Analysis Of Child Care Demand In Switzerland," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 80(1), pages 37-66, March.
    3. Awad Mataria & Stéphane Luchini & Yousef Daoud & Jean-Paul Moatti, 2007. "Demand assessment and price-elasticity estimation of quality-improved primary health care in palestine: a contribution from the contingent valuation method," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(10), pages 1051-1068.
    4. Mohammad Abu‐Zaineh & Olivier Chanel & Khaled Makhloufi, 2022. "Estimating willingness to pay for public health insurance while accounting for protest responses: A further step towards universal health coverage in Tunisia?," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 2809-2821, September.
    5. Shackley, Phil & Donaldson, Cam, 2002. "Should we use willingness to pay to elicit community preferences for health care?: New evidence from using a 'marginal' approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 971-991, November.
    6. Liz Morrell & Sarah Wordsworth & Sian Rees & Richard Barker, 2017. "Does the Public Prefer Health Gain for Cancer Patients? A Systematic Review of Public Views on Cancer and its Characteristics," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(8), pages 793-804, August.
    7. Till Seuring & Olga Archangelidi & Marc Suhrcke, 2015. "The Economic Costs of Type 2 Diabetes: A Global Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(8), pages 811-831, August.
    8. Adam Oliver, 2013. "Testing Procedural Invariance In The Context Of Health," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(3), pages 272-288, March.
    9. Linnea Polgreen & John Brooks, 2012. "Estimating Incremental Costs with Skew," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 10(5), pages 319-329, September.
    10. Mandy Ryan & Mabelle Amaya‐Amaya, 2005. "‘Threats’ to and hopes for estimating benefits," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(6), pages 609-619, June.
    11. Oliver, Adam, 2013. "Testing the rate of preference reversal in personal and social decision-making," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1250-1257.
    12. Jacoline Bouvy & Just Weemers & Huub Schellekens & Marc Koopmanschap, 2011. "Willingness to Pay for Adverse Drug Event Regulatory Actions," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 29(11), pages 963-975, November.
    13. George Houtven & Melonie Sullivan & Chris Dockins, 2008. "Cancer premiums and latency effects: A risk tradeoff approach for valuing reductions in fatal cancer risks," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 179-199, April.
    14. Awad Mataria & Stéphane Luchini & Yousef Daoud & Jean‐Paul Moatti, 2007. "Demand assessment and price‐elasticity estimation of quality‐improved primary health care in palestine: a contribution from the contingent valuation method," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(10), pages 1051-1068, October.
    15. Mataria, Awad & Donaldson, Cam & Luchini, Stephane & Moatti, Jean-Paul, 2004. "A stated preference approach to assessing health care-quality improvements in Palestine: from theoretical validity to policy implications," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 1285-1311, November.

    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:53:y:2001:i:8:p:1023-1036. 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.