Severity of illness and priority setting: worrisome lack of discussion of surprising finding.

[1]  Aki Tsuchiya,et al.  Health priorities and public preferences: the relative importance of past health experience and future health prospects. , 2005, Journal of health economics.

[2]  E. Nord.  Severity of illness versus expected benefit in societal evaluation of healthcare interventions , 2001, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[3]  A. Williams.  The 'fair innings argument' deserves a fairer hearing! Comments by Alan Williams on Nord and Johannesson. , 2001, Health economics.

[4]  T. Marmor.  In pursuit of an improving National Health Service edited by Alain C. Enthoven. The Nuffield Trust, London, 1999. No. of pages: 126. ISBN 1-902089-37-5 , 2000 .

[5]  P. Ubel,et al.  How stable are people's preferences for giving priority to severely ill patients? , 1999, Social science & medicine.

[6]  P. Dolan,et al.  Using the person trade-off approach to examine differences between individual and social values. , 1998, Health economics.

[7]  A. Williams,et al.  Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the 'fair innings' argument. , 1997, Health economics.

[8]  D. Callahan,et al.  Setting mental health priorities: problems and possibilities. , 1994, The Milbank quarterly.

[9]  E. Nord.  The trade-off between severity of illness and treatment effect in cost-value analysis of health care. , 1993, Health policy.

[10]  N. Daniels.  Rationing fairly: programmatic considerations. , 1993, Bioethics.

[11]  M. Postma,et al.  Discounting health effects in pharmacoeconomic evaluations: current controversies. , 2005, PharmacoEconomics.

[12]  E. Nord.  Concerns for the worse off: fair innings versus severity. , 2005, Social science & medicine.

[13]  J. Richardson.  The poverty of ethical analyses in economics and the unwarranted disregard of evidence , 2002 .

[14]  P. Dolan,et al.  The measurement of individual utility and social welfare. , 1998, Journal of health economics.