Table 2 Allocation criteria explored, including Cost and Effectiveness Trade-off scenarios
Criteria | Baseline Scenario: All else being equal (equal treatment costs and effectiveness) | Effectiveness Trade-off Scenario | Cost Trade-off Scenario |
|---|---|---|---|
Disease severity | Should more budget go to patients with severe disease (Group 1) than those with mild disease (Group 2)? | Smaller treatment effectiveness for severe disease (Group 1) compared with mild disease (Group 2) | Higher costs of treatment for severe disease (Group 1) compared with mild disease (Group 2) |
Age (Children or Adults) | Should more budget go to children (Group 1) than adult patients (Group 2)? | Smaller treatment effectiveness for children’s diseases (Group 1) compared with adult diseases (Group 2) | Higher costs of treatment for children’s diseases (Group 1) compared with adult diseases (Group 2) |
Daily care Needs | Should more budget go to patients dependent on carers for daily tasks (Group 1) compared to those who are not dependent (Group 2)? | Smaller treatment effectiveness for patients who are dependent on carers for daily tasks (Group 1) compared to those who are not dependent (Group 2) | Higher costs of treatment for patients who are dependent on carers for daily tasks (Group 1) compared to those who are not dependent (Group 2) |
Access to Alternative Interventions | Should more budget go to patients for whom there is no alternative available (Group 1) compared to those for whom there are several alternatives (Group 2)? | Smaller treatment effectiveness for patients for whom there is no alternative available (Group 1) compared to those for whom there are several alternatives (Group 2) | Higher costs of treatment for patients for whom there is no alternative available (Group 1) compared to those for whom there are several alternatives (Group 2) |
Individual’s Economic status | Should more budget go to economically disadvantaged patients (Group 1) compared to those who are economically well off (Group 2)? | Smaller treatment effectiveness for economically disadvantaged patients (Group 1) compared to those who are economically well off (Group 2) | Higher costs of treatment for economically disadvantaged patients (Group 1) compared to those who are economically well off (Group 2) |
Population Size (Common or Rare Diseases) | Should more budget go to patients with rare disease (Group 1) compared to those with common diseases (Group 2)? | Smaller treatment effectiveness for patients with rare disease (Group 1) compared to those with common diseases (Group 2) | Higher costs of treatment for patients with rare disease (Group 1) compared to those with common diseases (Group 2) |
Diseases with Absence from work | Should more budget go to patients whose diseases affect their ability to work (Group 1) compared to those who are able to continue working (Group 2)? | Smaller treatment effectiveness for patients whose diseases affect their ability to work (Group 1) compared to those who are able to continue working (Group 2) | Higher costs of treatment for patients whose diseases affect their ability to work (Group 1) compared to those who are able to continue working (Group 2) |
Lifestyle-related diseases | Should more budget go to patients with an unrelated lifestyle disease (Group 1) compared to those with a related lifestyle disease (Group 2)? | Smaller treatment effectiveness for patients with an unrelated lifestyle disease (Group 1) compared to those with a related lifestyle disease (Group 2) | Higher costs of treatment for patients with an unrelated lifestyle disease (Group 1) compared to those with a related lifestyle disease (Group 2) |