Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 Sep;20(7):1041-1061.
doi: 10.1007/s10198-019-01076-9. Epub 2019 Jun 6.

How to value safety in economic evaluations in health care? A review of applications in different sectors

Affiliations
Review

How to value safety in economic evaluations in health care? A review of applications in different sectors

Meg Perry-Duxbury et al. Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Sep.

Abstract

Improving (feelings of) safety is an important goal of many health systems, especially in the context of recurrent threats of pandemics, and natural disasters. Measures to improve safety should be cost-effective, raising the issue of how to value safety. This is a complex task due to the intangible nature of safety. We aim to synthesize the current empirical literature on the evaluation of safety to gain insights into current methodological practices. After a thorough literature search in two databases for papers from the fields of life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences that empirically measure the value of increasing safety, 33 papers were found and summarized. The focus of the research was to investigate the methodologies used. Attention was also paid to theoretical papers and the methodological issues they present, and the relationship between safety and three categories of covariate results: individual characteristics, individual relationship with risk, and study design. The field of research in which the most papers were found was environmental economics, followed by transportation and health. There appeared to be two main methods for valuating safety: Contingent Valuation and Discrete Choice Experiments, within which there were also differences-for example the use of open or dichotomous choice questions. Overall this paper finds that there still appears to be a long way ahead before consensus can be attained about a standardised methodology for valuating safety. Safety valuation research would benefit from learning from previous experience and the development of more standardised methods.

Keywords: Literature review; Public health; Safety; Stated preferences.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Alberini A, Hunt A, Markandya A. Willingness to pay to reduce mortality risks: evidence from a three-country contingent valuation study. Environ. Resource Econ. 2006;33:251–264. doi: 10.1007/s10640-005-3106-2. - DOI
    1. Andersson H. Willingness to pay for road safety and estimates of the risk of death: evidence from a Swedish contingent valuation study. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2007;39:853–865. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2006.12.008. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Atkinson G, Healey A, Mourato S. Valuing the costs of violent crime: a stated preference approach. Oxf. Econ. Pap. 2005;57:559–585. doi: 10.1093/oep/gpi036. - DOI
    1. Ball DJ. Consumer affairs and the valuation of safety. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2000;32:337–343. doi: 10.1016/S0001-4575(99)00055-X. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Becker ML, Kallewaard M, Caspers PW, Visser LE, Leufkens HG, Stricker BH. Hospitalisations and emergency department visits due to drug–drug interactions: a literature review. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 2007;16:641–651. doi: 10.1002/pds.1351. - DOI - PubMed