<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Eeckhoudt, L.</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/14078/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Aversion to health inequalities and priority setting in health care (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/14347/</link>
      <pubDate>2008-12-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Traditionally aversion to health inequality is modelled through a concave utility function over health outcomes. Bleichrodt et al. [Bleichrodt, H., Diecidue E., Quiggin J., 2004. Equity weights in the allocation of health care: the rank-dependent QALY model. Journal of Health Economics 23, 157-171] have suggested a "dual" approach based on the introduction of explicit equity weights. The purpose of this paper is to analyze how priorities in health care are determined in the framework of these two models. It turns out that policy implications are highly sensitive to the choice of the model that will represent aversion to health inequality.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Aversion to Health Inequalities and Priority Setting in Health Care (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/11074/</link>
      <pubDate>2007-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Traditionally aversion to health inequality is modelled through a concave utility function over
health outcomes. Bleichrodt et al. (2004) have suggested a "dual" approach based on the
introduction of explicit equity weights. The purpose of this paper is to analyze how priorities
in health care are determined in the framework of these two models. It turns out that policy
implications are highly sensitive to the choice of the model that will represent aversion to
health inequality.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Survival risks, intertemporal consumption, and insurance: the case of distorted probabilities (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/10987/</link>
      <pubDate>2006-04-07T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>This paper explores how to evaluate changes in survival probabilities when people do not process probabilities linearly, as is commonly assumed in the literature, but distort probabilities. We show that the valuation of risks to life depends critically on two parameters: the elasticity of the probability weighting function and the elasticity of the utility function with respect to future consumption. Using estimates from the empirical literature we derive that the bias of erroneously ignoring probability distortion in general leads to cost–benefit ratios that are too high and that generate too much priority for programs that save young lives.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Willingness to Pay for Reductions in Health Risk When Probabilities Are Distorted (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/10988/</link>
      <pubDate>2006-02-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>We study the willingness to pay for reductions in health risks when people do not evaluate probabilities linearly, as is commonly assumed in elicitations of willingness to pay, but weight probabilities, as is commonly observed in empirical studies of decision under risk. We show that for the levels of baseline risk typically considered, probability weighting strongly affects willingness to pay estimates and may lead to unstable monetary valuations of health.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>The Economic Value of Informal Care: A Study of Informal  Caregivers' and Patients' Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept for Informal Care (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/10991/</link>
      <pubDate>2005-04-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>We provide a new test of the feasibility of using contingent valuation to value informal care. We start with a theoretical model of informal caregiving and derive that willingness to pay depends positively on wealth and negatively on own health, whereas the effect of other's health is sign-ambiguous. These predictions are tested in two new data sets on patients' and caregivers' willingness to pay (WTP) and willingness to accept (WTA) for informal care. The data are generally consistent with the theoretical predictions: wealth generally has a positive impact and own health a negative impact. Other's health has a mixed effect. We find only small differences between WTP and WTA. Our findings suggest that contingent valuation may be a useful technique to value informal care in economic evaluations of health care.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Saving under Rank-Dependent Utility (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/10992/</link>
      <pubDate>2005-02-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>In this note we use the rank-dependent utility (RDU) model to analyze saving decisions. The RDU model enables us to separate the effects of pessimism and optimism on saving from that of concavity of the utility function. While pessimism induces more saving, the importance of this effect is shown to depend upon properties of the utility function such as prudence and temperance.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Comorbidities and the Willingness to Pay for Health Improvements (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/10997/</link>
      <pubDate>2003-10-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>We show that the willingness to pay for health improvements increases with the severity and probability of occurrence of comorbidities. This result, which is obtained under mild restrictions on the shape of the utility function, has important implications for cost benefit studies applied to health care. In particular it implies that the discrimination of the elderly, believed to be implicit in cost benefit analysis, is less of a problem than commonly thought.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>The Effect of Comorbidities on Treatment Decisions (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/10996/</link>
      <pubDate>2003-09-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Medical decision analyses typically focus on one disease, that is, on one source of risk. In many medical decisions multiple sources of risk co-exist, however. This paper analyzes the effect of such comorbidities on treatment decisions. The effect of comorbidities on treatment decisions depends primarily on the way in which the patient’s attitude to health status risks varies with duration. In the QALY model comorbidities do not affect treatment decisions. This property of the QALY model can be used as a diagnostic test of its descriptive and prescriptive validity.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>