arxiv: 2605.01763 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-03 · 💰 econ.TH

Recognition: unknown

Integrating equity and productivity in health evaluation

Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, Kristian S. Hansen, Lars P. {\O}sterdal

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 16:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💰 econ.TH

keywords health evaluationequity and productivityQALY extensionspower-form functionsPigou-Dalton transfersnormative axiomseconomic evaluation of healthscale independence

0 comments

The pith

Imposing scale independence and Pigou-Dalton transfers yields power-form functions that integrate equity and productivity in health evaluation.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a unified framework for evaluating health outcomes by jointly considering equity in health distribution and gains in productive capacity. It extends measures like QALYs by introducing evaluation functions that respond to both equity and productivity concerns. Through normative criteria such as independence from measurement scales and Pigou-Dalton transfer principles, the authors derive tractable power-form representations. This approach matters because it gives a coherent method for assessing interventions where health improvements affect both well-being and economic output.

Core claim

By imposing several normative criteria, including independence from measurement scales and Pigou-Dalton transfer principles, we obtain tractable power-form representations for a broader class of evaluation functions that integrate equity- and productivity-sensitive conditions.

What carries the argument

Power-form representations derived from scale independence and Pigou-Dalton transfer principles applied to equity- and productivity-sensitive evaluation functions.

If this is right

Evaluation of health interventions can use power-form functions to balance equity and efficiency.
The framework extends traditional QALYs, PALYs, and PQALYs to include productivity.
Interventions affecting both health and productive capacity can be assessed coherently.
Normative criteria provide a foundation for policy decisions in health economics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

These power forms could inform cost-effectiveness analyses by incorporating productivity losses from disease equitably.
Future work might calibrate the power parameters using empirical data on societal preferences for health equity versus productivity.
Similar axiomatic approaches could apply to other domains like education or environmental policy where equity and output trade off.
If the axioms hold, this changes how health technology assessments weight productivity gains across different groups.

Load-bearing premise

The normative criteria of independence from measurement scales and Pigou-Dalton transfers correctly capture the desired equity and productivity sensitivities in health evaluation.

What would settle it

Survey or experimental data showing that people's rankings of health interventions violate the power-form structure or the underlying axioms when productivity is involved would challenge the framework's applicability.

read the original abstract

This paper develops a unified framework for evaluating health outcomes that jointly incorporates equity and productivity. Extending beyond traditional QALYs, PALYs, and the more recent PQALYs, we introduce a broader class of evaluation functions that integrate equity- and productivity-sensitive conditions. By imposing several normative criteria, including independence from measurement scales and Pigou-Dalton transfer principles, we obtain tractable power-form representations. In balancing equity and efficiency, the framework provides a coherent foundation for assessing interventions in contexts where both health and productive capacity are at stake.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper derives power-form health evaluators from scale independence and joint Pigou-Dalton transfers, extending QALY/PALY/PQALY, but the uniqueness step for linked attributes needs explicit verification.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that Hansen, Moreno-Ternero, and Østerdal axiomatize a broader family of evaluation functions for health outcomes that incorporate both equity across individuals and effects on productive capacity. They start from normative conditions like scale independence and Pigou-Dalton transfers applied to the joint distribution and arrive at tractable power forms that nest the standard measures as special cases. This is a direct extension of the social choice literature on health metrics rather than a data-driven exercise. What works is the explicit motivation of the axioms and the focus on usable representations for policy ranking when both well-being and labor supply are at stake. The setup stays within standard equity-efficiency trade-offs without redefining the target by construction. The soft spot is technical. The abstract states that the criteria yield the power forms, yet the joint transfer principle across two attributes can admit other solutions if any implicit separability creeps in during the functional equation step. The paper should show the full derivation, confirm that no hidden additive or multiplicative structure is assumed when transfers operate on the combined vector, and verify the reduction to the QALY/PALY/PQALY limits. Without those details the uniqueness claim rests on the abstract alone. This is for readers who work with axiomatic health economics or need formal tools for equity-sensitive productivity adjustments. A serious referee would be appropriate because the topic is policy-relevant, the approach is systematic, and the central claim is checkable once the proofs are examined. I would send it to review.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper develops a unified axiomatic framework for evaluating health outcomes that jointly incorporates equity and productivity considerations. Extending QALYs, PALYs, and PQALYs, it imposes normative criteria including independence from measurement scales and Pigou-Dalton transfer principles to derive tractable power-form representations suitable for assessing interventions where both health and productive capacity matter.

Significance. If the central derivation is rigorous and free of hidden separability assumptions, the resulting power forms would supply a flexible normative tool that generalizes existing health metrics while balancing equity and efficiency; this is a strength for theoretical health economics where policy contexts require joint evaluation of distributional and productivity effects.

major comments (2)

[Main representation theorem / axiomatic derivation section] The main representation result (likely Theorem 1 or equivalent in the axiomatic section): the claim that scale-independence combined with joint Pigou-Dalton transfers on the two attributes yields unique power forms is not yet shown to exclude other solutions; the proof must explicitly verify that no implicit additive or multiplicative separability is introduced when the transfer principle is applied across health and productivity, as this would undermine uniqueness and the generalization to QALY/PALY/PQALY limits.
[Limits to existing measures / special cases] Section deriving the power forms or the limits subsection: it is unclear whether the framework demonstrates explicit parameter restrictions under which the general form reduces to standard QALY (pure health), PALY (pure productivity), or PQALY cases; without this reduction shown, the extension claim lacks full verification.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract refers to 'several normative criteria' without enumerating them; adding a short list would improve accessibility before the detailed axioms are introduced.
[Preliminaries / notation] Notation for the joint evaluation function, health attribute, and productivity attribute should be introduced with explicit definitions and domains at the start of the formal section to prevent ambiguity in later equations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below, indicating where revisions will be made to strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Main representation theorem / axiomatic derivation section] The main representation result (likely Theorem 1 or equivalent in the axiomatic section): the claim that scale-independence combined with joint Pigou-Dalton transfers on the two attributes yields unique power forms is not yet shown to exclude other solutions; the proof must explicitly verify that no implicit additive or multiplicative separability is introduced when the transfer principle is applied across health and productivity, as this would undermine uniqueness and the generalization to QALY/PALY/PQALY limits.

Authors: We appreciate the referee's emphasis on rigor in the uniqueness argument. The derivation solves the functional equation obtained from scale independence together with the joint Pigou-Dalton condition applied simultaneously to the two attributes; the resulting power form is the unique continuous solution satisfying these axioms without presupposing separability. Nevertheless, to make the absence of implicit separability fully transparent, we will revise the proof of the main representation theorem by inserting an explicit verification step (or auxiliary lemma) that shows the joint transfer principle does not reduce to additive or multiplicative separability. This addition will also clarify why the power family properly generalizes the QALY/PALY/PQALY limits. revision: yes
Referee: [Limits to existing measures / special cases] Section deriving the power forms or the limits subsection: it is unclear whether the framework demonstrates explicit parameter restrictions under which the general form reduces to standard QALY (pure health), PALY (pure productivity), or PQALY cases; without this reduction shown, the extension claim lacks full verification.

Authors: We agree that explicit reductions are necessary to substantiate the claim of generalization. The general power form is constructed so that suitable choices of the equity-sensitivity and productivity-weight parameters recover the standard cases (e.g., zero productivity weight yields a pure-health QALY-like form, and specific boundary values of the equity parameter recover PALY and PQALY). We will expand the limits subsection to state these parameter restrictions explicitly, derive the corresponding functional forms, and include the requisite limiting arguments. This will make the embedding of existing measures fully verifiable. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Axiomatic derivation from external normative criteria is self-contained

full rationale

The paper states that imposing independence from measurement scales and Pigou-Dalton transfer principles on a joint equity-productivity evaluator yields tractable power-form representations. These criteria are presented as externally motivated normative axioms rather than being fitted to data or defined in terms of the target functions. No self-citation is load-bearing for the central claim, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no ansatz is smuggled via citation. The abstract and described approach contain no reduction of the power forms to their inputs by construction; the derivation chain remains independent of the final representations. This is the standard pattern for axiomatic characterizations in welfare economics and yields a score of 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on two normative conditions presented as sufficient to characterize power forms; these are treated as domain assumptions rather than derived results.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Independence from measurement scales
Invoked to ensure the evaluation function is invariant under rescaling of health units and to obtain tractable representations.
domain assumption Pigou-Dalton transfer principles
Imposed to encode equity sensitivity by requiring that transfers from healthier to less healthy individuals improve the evaluation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5383 in / 1349 out tokens · 46339 ms · 2026-05-09T16:19:57.250986+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references

[1]

A short course on functional equations

Acz´ el, J., 1987. A short course on functional equations. D. Reidel Publishing Company

1987
[2]

Lectures on functional equations and their applications

Acz´ el, J., 2006. Lectures on functional equations and their applications. Dover

2006
[3]

Ademi, Z., Abushanab, D., Arvez, M.J.A., Marquina, C., Vivoda, K., Martikainen, J., Lavikainen, P., Lloyd, M., Liew, D., 2025. Scoping Review of Productivity-Adjusted Life 27This follows from the structure of the proof of Theorem 2.6b in Moulin (1988), originally attributed to Roberts (1980), which parallels the Bergson-Samuelson result. Specifically, the...

2025
[4]

Productivity-Adjusted Life-years: A New Metric for Quantifying Disease Burden

Ademi, Z., Ackerman, I.N., Zomer, E., Liew, D., 2021. Productivity-Adjusted Life-years: A New Metric for Quantifying Disease Burden. PharmacoEconomics 39, 271-273

2021
[5]

Well-being and fair distribution: beyond cost-benefit analysis

Adler, M., 2012. Well-being and fair distribution: beyond cost-benefit analysis. Oxford University Press

2012
[6]

Risk, Death, and Well-Being: The Ethical Foundations of Fatality Risk Regulation

Adler, M., 2025. Risk, Death, and Well-Being: The Ethical Foundations of Fatality Risk Regulation. Oxford University Press

2025
[7]

Fair innings? The utilitarian and prioritarian value of risk reduction over a whole lifetime

Adler, M.D., Ferranna, M., Hammitt, J.K., Treich, N., 2021. Fair innings? The utilitarian and prioritarian value of risk reduction over a whole lifetime. Journal of Health Economics 75, 102412

2021
[8]

Fair innings: an empirical test

Adler, M.D., Ferranna, M., Hammitt, J.K., de Laubier, E., Treich, N., 2025. Fair innings: an empirical test. Health Economics 34, 1350-1364

2025
[9]

Examining equity effects of health interventions in cost-effectiveness analysis: a systematic review

Avance˜ na, A.L., Prosser, L.A., 2021. Examining equity effects of health interventions in cost-effectiveness analysis: a systematic review. Value in Health 24, 136-143

2021
[10]

The impact of working conditions on mental health: Novel evidence from the UK

Belloni, M., Carrino, L., Meschi, E., 2022. The impact of working conditions on mental health: Novel evidence from the UK. Labour Economics 76, 102176

2022
[11]

Health utility indices and equity considerations

Bleichrodt, H., 1997. Health utility indices and equity considerations. Journal of Health Economics 16, 65-91

1997
[12]

Life-cycle preferences over consumption and health: When is cost-effectiveness analysis equivalent to cost-benefit analysis? Journal of Health Economics 18, 681-708

Bleichrodt, H., Quiggin, J., 1999. Life-cycle preferences over consumption and health: When is cost-effectiveness analysis equivalent to cost-benefit analysis? Journal of Health Economics 18, 681-708

1999
[13]

Characterizing QALYs by risk neu- trality

Bleichrodt, H., Wakker, P., Johannesson, M., 1997. Characterizing QALYs by risk neu- trality. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 15, 107-114

1997
[14]

E., Canning, D., Sevilla, J., 2004

Bloom, D. E., Canning, D., Sevilla, J., 2004. The effect of health on economic growth: a production function approach. World Development 32, 1-13. 36

2004
[15]

Age-weighting

Bognar, G., 2008. Age-weighting. Economics & Philosophy 24, 167-189

2008
[16]

A consistent multidimensional Pigou-Dalton transfer principle

Bosmans, K., Lauwers, L., Ooghe, E., 2009. A consistent multidimensional Pigou-Dalton transfer principle. Journal of Economic Theory 144, 1358-1371

2009
[17]

Broome, J., 1993. Qalys. Journal of Public Economics 50, 149-167

1993
[18]

Real income, expenditure proportionality, and Frisch’s new methods of measuring marginal utility

Burk, A., 1936. Real income, expenditure proportionality, and Frisch’s new methods of measuring marginal utility. Review of Economic Studies 4, 33-52

1936
[19]

Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Review of the Literature

Clark, M.D., Determann, D., Petrou, S., Moro, D., de Bekker-Grob, E., 2014. Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Review of the Literature. PharmacoEco- nomics 32, 883-902

2014
[20]

eds., 2020

Cookson, R., Griffin, S., Norheim, O.F., Culyer, A.J. eds., 2020. Distributional cost- effectiveness analysis: quantifying health equity impacts and trade-offs. Oxford University Press

2020
[21]

Measurement of inequality

Cowell, F.A., 2000. Measurement of inequality. Handbook of Income Distribution, Volume 1, 87-166

2000
[22]

Currie, J., Madrian, B. C. (1999). Health, Health Insurance and the Labor Market. In O. Ashenfelter and D. Card (eds.), Handbook of Labor Economics, Vol. 3C, Elsevier, pp. 3309-3416

1999
[23]

J., Wagstaff, A., 1993

Culyer, A. J., Wagstaff, A., 1993. Equity and equality in health and health care. Journal of Health Economics 12, 431-457

1993
[24]

Distributionally sensitive measurement and valuation of population health

Da Costa, S., O’Donnell, O., Van Gestel, R., 2024. Distributionally sensitive measurement and valuation of population health. Journal of Health Economics 93, 102847

2024
[25]

Topological methods in cardinal utility theory, in K

Debreu, G., 1960. Topological methods in cardinal utility theory, in K. Arrow, S. Karlin and P. Suppes, (Eds.), Mathematical methods in the social sciences. Stanford University Press

1960
[26]

J., Shah, K

Devlin, N. J., Shah, K. K., Feng, Y., Mulhern, B., Van Hout, B., 2018. Valuing health- related quality of life: An EQ”5D”5L value set for England. Health Economics 27, 7-22. 37

2018
[27]

The measurement of individual utility and social welfare

Dolan, P., 1998. The measurement of individual utility and social welfare. Journal of Health Economics 17, 39-52

1998
[28]

Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes

Drummond, M.F., Sculpher, M.J., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G.L., Torrance, G.W., 2015. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Fourth edition. Oxford University Press

2015
[29]

Can a single indicator measure both attainment and shortfall inequal- ity? Journal of Health Economics 28, 885-893

Erreygers, G., 2009. Can a single indicator measure both attainment and shortfall inequal- ity? Journal of Health Economics 28, 885-893

2009
[30]

An international comparison of the cost of work- related accidents and illnesses

Elsler, D., Takala, J., Remes, J., 2017. An international comparison of the cost of work- related accidents and illnesses. Brussels: European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Retrieved on January 28, 2025

2017
[31]

GBD 2021 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators, 2024. Global incidence, prevalence, years lived with disability (YLDs), disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and healthy life ex- pectancy (HALE) for 371 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories and 811 subnational locations, 1990-2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease St...

2021
[32]

Equivalent income and fair evaluation of health care

Fleurbaey, M., Luchini, S., Muller, C., Schokkaert, E., 2013. Equivalent income and fair evaluation of health care. Health Economics 22, 711-729

2013
[33]

Quality- and productivity- adjusted life years: From QALYs to PALYs and beyond

Hansen, K.S., Moreno-Ternero, J.D., Østerdal, L.P., 2024. Quality- and productivity- adjusted life years: From QALYs to PALYs and beyond. Journal of Health Economics 95, 102885

2024
[34]

K., Rheinberger, C

Herrera-Araujo, D., Hammitt, J. K., Rheinberger, C. M., 2020. Theoretical bounds on the value of improved health. Journal of Health Economics 72, 102341

2020
[35]

A new axiomatic approach to the evaluation of population health

Hougaard, J., Moreno-Ternero, J.D., Østerdal, L.P., 2013. A new axiomatic approach to the evaluation of population health. Journal of Health Economics 32, 515-523

2013
[36]

A structural analysis of mental health and labour market trajectories

Jolivet, G., Postel-Vinay, F., 2025. A structural analysis of mental health and labour market trajectories. Review of Economic Studies 92, 1920-1954. 38

2025
[37]

Deriving distribu- tional weights for QALYs through discrete choice experiments

Lancsar, E., Wildman, J., Donaldson, C., Ryan, M., Baker, R., 2011. Deriving distribu- tional weights for QALYs through discrete choice experiments. Journal of Health Eco- nomics 30, 466-478

2011
[38]

Proposing indicators to measure achievement and shortfall inequality consistently

Laso de la Vega, C., Aristondo, O., 2012. Proposing indicators to measure achievement and shortfall inequality consistently. Journal of Health Economics 31, 578-583

2012
[39]

Presenteeism: A review and research directions

Lohaus, D., Habermann, W., 2019. Presenteeism: A review and research directions. Human Resource Management Review 29, 43-58

2019
[40]

A review of methods to measure health-related productivity loss

Mattke, S., Balakrishnan, A., Bergamo, G., Newberry, S.J., 2007. A review of methods to measure health-related productivity loss. American Journal of Managed Care 13, 211-217

2007
[41]

Quality-adjusted life years, utility theory, and healthy years equivalents

Mehrez, A., Gafni, A., 1989. Quality-adjusted life years, utility theory, and healthy years equivalents. Medical Decision Making 9, 142-149

1989
[42]

The zero-condition: A simpli- fying assumption in QALY measurement and multiattribute utility

Miyamoto, J., Wakker, P., Bleichrodt, H., Peters, H., 1998. The zero-condition: A simpli- fying assumption in QALY measurement and multiattribute utility. Management Science 44, 839-849

1998
[43]

QALYs, DALYs, and HALYs: a unifying framework for the evaluation of population health

Moreno-Ternero, J.D., Platz, T.T., Østerdal, L.P., 2023. QALYs, DALYs, and HALYs: a unifying framework for the evaluation of population health. Journal of Health Economics 87, 102714

2023
[44]

A normative foundation for equity-sensitive health evaluation: The role of relative comparisons of health gains

Moreno-Ternero, J.D., Østerdal, L.P., 2017. A normative foundation for equity-sensitive health evaluation: The role of relative comparisons of health gains. Journal of Public Economic Theory 19, 1009-1025

2017
[45]

Measurement scales and welfarist social choice

Morreau, M., Weymark, J.A., 2016. Measurement scales and welfarist social choice. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 75, 127-136

2016
[46]

Axioms of cooperative decision making

Moulin, H., 1988. Axioms of cooperative decision making. Cambridge University Press

1988
[47]

Rethinking DALYs

Murray, C., 1996. Rethinking DALYs. In: Murray, C.J.L., Lopez, A.D. (eds.) The Global Burden of Disease. Harvard University Press, Boston

1996
[48]

J., Sanders, G

Neumann, P. J., Sanders, G. D., Russell, L. B., Siegel, J. E., Ganiats, T. G. (Eds.), 2016. Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Oxford University Press. 39

2016
[49]

NICE technology appraisal and highly specialised technologies guidance: the manual

NICE, 2025. NICE technology appraisal and highly specialised technologies guidance: the manual. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence

2025
[50]

Diminishing returns at work: The consequences of long working hours

Pencavel, J.H., 2018. Diminishing returns at work: The consequences of long working hours. Oxford University Press

2018
[51]

Utility functions for life years and health status

Pliskin, J., Shepard, D., Weinstein, M., 1980. Utility functions for life years and health status. Operations Research 28, 206-224

1980
[52]

Assessing the health and welfare benefits of interventions using the Wider Societal Impacts framework

Premji, S., Griffin, S., 2024. Assessing the health and welfare benefits of interventions using the Wider Societal Impacts framework. Value in Health 27, 1479-1487

2024
[53]

EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group

Rabin, R., Charro, F.D., 2001. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Annals of Medicine 33, 337-343

2001
[54]

W., 1980

Roberts, K. W., 1980. Interpersonal comparability and social choice theory. The Review of Economic Studies 47, 421-439

1980
[55]

Do social preferences explain health inequality aversion? The Journal of Economic Inequality 23, 933-956

Robson, M., Doran, T., O’Donnell, O., Van Ourti, T., 2025a. Do social preferences explain health inequality aversion? The Journal of Economic Inequality 23, 933-956
[56]

Aversion to health inequality-Pure, income-related and income-caused

Robson, M., O’Donnell, O., Van Ourti, T., 2024. Aversion to health inequality-Pure, income-related and income-caused. Journal of Health Economics 94, 102856

2024
[57]

Responsibility-sensitive welfare weights for health

Robson, M., O’Donnell, O., Van Ourti, T., 2025b. Responsibility-sensitive welfare weights for health. Journal of Health Economics 102, 103018
[58]

A., 1965

Samuelson, P. A., 1965. Using full duality to show that simultaneously additive direct and indirect utilities implies unitary price elasticity of demand. Econometrica 33, 781-796

1965
[59]

The use of work environment performance indicators in corporate social responsibility reporting

Searcy, C., Dixon, S.M., Neumann, W.P., 2016. The use of work environment performance indicators in corporate social responsibility reporting. Journal of Cleaner Production 112, 2907-2921

2016
[60]

Health, nutrition, and economic development

Strauss, J., Thomas, D., 1998. Health, nutrition, and economic development. Journal of Economic Literature 36, 766-817. 40

1998
[61]

Productivity estimation in economic evaluations of occupational health and safety interventions: a systematic review

Steel, J., Godderis, L., Luyten, J., 2018. Productivity estimation in economic evaluations of occupational health and safety interventions: a systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health 44, 458-474

2018
[62]

J., Dolinschi, R., 2008

Tompa, E., Culyer, A. J., Dolinschi, R., 2008. Economic evaluation of interventions for occupational health and safety: developing good practice. Oxford University Press

2008
[63]

QALYs and ageism: philosophical theories and age weighting

Tsuchiya, A., 2000. QALYs and ageism: philosophical theories and age weighting. Health Economics, 9, 57-68

2000
[64]

QALYs and the equity-efficiency trade-off

Wagstaff A., 1991. QALYs and the equity-efficiency trade-off. Journal of Health Economics 10, 21-41

1991
[65]

Accounting for the effect of health on economic growth

Weil, D., 2007. Accounting for the effect of health on economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 122, 1265-1306

2007
[66]

Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities

Whitehead, S., Ali, S., 2010. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. British Medical Bulletin 96, 5-21

2010
[67]

Equity in health

Williams, A., Cookson, R., 2000. Equity in health. Handbook of Health Economics, Volume 1, 1863-1910

2000
[68]

Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the ‘fair innings’ argument

Williams, A., 1997. Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the ‘fair innings’ argument. Health Economics 6, 117-132

1997
[69]

Measuring and valuing productivity loss due to poor health: A critical review

Zhang, W., Bansback, N., Anis, A.H., 2011. Measuring and valuing productivity loss due to poor health: A critical review. Social Science and Medicine 72, 185-192

2011
[70]

Axioms for health care resource allocation

Østerdal, L.P., 2005. Axioms for health care resource allocation. Journal of Health Eco- nomics 24, 679-702. 41

2005