摘要：Background : The present study aimed to provide better insight on methodological issues related to time preference studies, and to estimate private and social discount rates, using a rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods : We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Proquest databases in June 2013. All studies had estimated private and social time preference rates for health outcomes through stated preference approach, recognized eligible for inclusion. We conducted both fixed and random effect meta-analyses using mean discount rate and standard deviation of the included studies. I-square statistics was used for testing heterogeneity of the studies. Private and social discount rates were estimated separately via Stata11 software. Results : O ut of 44 screened full texts , 8 population-based empirical studies were included in qualitative synthesis. Reported time preference rates for own health were from 0.036 to 0.07 and for social health from 0.04 to 0.2. Private and social discount rates were estimated at 0.056 (95% CI: 0.038 , 0.074) and 0.066 (95% CI: 0.064 , 0.068) , respectively. Conclusions : Considering the impact of time preference on healthy behaviors and because of timing issues, individual’s time preference as a key determenant of policy making should be taken into account. Direct translation of elicited discount rates to the official discount rates has been remained questionable. Decisions about the proper discount rate for health context, may need a cross-party consensus among health economists and policy makers.
其他摘要：Background : The present study aimed to provide better insight on methodological issues related to time preference studies, and to estimate private and social discount rates, using a rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods : We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Proquest databases in June 2013. All studies had estimated private and social time preference rates for health outcomes through stated preference approach, recognized eligible for inclusion. We conducted both fixed and random effect meta-analyses using mean discount rate and standard deviation of the included studies. I-square statistics was used for testing heterogeneity of the studies. Private and social discount rates were estimated separately via Stata11 software. Results : O ut of 44 screened full texts , 8 population-based empirical studies were included in qualitative synthesis. Reported time preference rates for own health were from 0.036 to 0.07 and for social health from 0.04 to 0.2. Private and social discount rates were estimated at 0.056 (95% CI: 0.038 , 0.074) and 0.066 (95% CI: 0.064 , 0.068) , respectively. Conclusions : Considering the impact of time preference on healthy behaviors and because of timing issues, individual’s time preference as a key determenant of policy making should be taken into account. Direct translation of elicited discount rates to the official discount rates has been remained questionable. Decisions about the proper discount rate for health context, may need a cross-party consensus among health economists and policy makers.
Loading...
