title: [In which categories should we think in when spending public health resources: value for money or rights for money?].
abstract: IQWiG, Germany's equivalent to Britain's NICE, has adopted an unorthodox method of cost-effectiveness analysis. The method does not use QALYs. Its main point is that it tries to avoid comparative judgement on the relative value of treatment effects in different medical areas. The present contribution assesses the controversy that has arisen over IQWiG's methods by discussing whether a. comparative judgements of the value of health will at least implicitly be made anyway as soon as IQWiG makes reimbursement recommendations in more than one medical area, and whether b. the well-known fairness objections to QALY maximization can plausibly be dealt with by equity weighting or, generally, by moving on to "societal value" maximization which tries to include fairness values besides efficiency. The conclusion is that the answer is no in both cases.
authors.affiliation: Institut für Philosophie, Universität Regensburg. Weyma.Luebbe@psk.uni-regensburg.de
authors.forename: Weyma
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Lübbe
mesh_terms: D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D004470:Economics, Medical / Q000592:standards*; D005858:Germany; D006801:Humans; D009014:Morals; D011634:Public Health / Q000191:economics* / Q000592:standards*; D012941:Social Responsibility; D012945:Social Values; D006113:United Kingdom