Abstract
Objectives: To explore various methods to quantify the burden of mortality, with a special interest for the more recent method at the core of calculations of disability adjusted life years (DALY).
Design: Various methods calculating the age schedule at death are applied to two historical life table populations. One method calculates the "years of life lost", by multiplying the numbers of deaths at age x by the residual life expectancy. This residual life expectancy may be discounted and age weighted. The other method calculates the "potential years of life lost" by multiplying the numbers of deaths at age x by the years missing to reach a defined threshold (65 years or 75 years).
Methods: The period life tables describing the mortality of Dutch male populations from 1900–10 (high mortality) and from 1990–1994 (low mortality).
Results: A standard life table with idealised long life expectancy increases the burden of death more if mortality is lower. People at old age, more prevalent if mortality is low, lose more life years in an idealised life table. The discounted life table decreases the burden of death strongly if mortality is high: the life lost by a person dying at a young age is discounted. Age weighting the discounted life table balances the effect of discounting.
Conclusions: For the purpose of description of the burden of mortality, the aggregate life table of the studied populations gives the better description of the age schedule at death. Discounting and the use of idealised lifetables as a standard increase the burden of mortality of degenerative disease at the end of life. The age weighted discounted life table violates the principle of parsimony.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (117.8 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Barendregt J. J., Bonneux L., Van der Maas P. J. DALYs: the age-weights on balance. Bull World Health Organ. 1996;74(4):439–443. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bonneux L., Birnie E. The discount rate in the economic evaluation of prevention: a thought experiment. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2001 Feb;55(2):123–125. doi: 10.1136/jech.55.2.123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Johannesson M., Johansson P. O. The discounting of lives saved in future generations--some empirical results. Health Econ. 1996 Jul-Aug;5(4):329–332. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199607)5:4<329::AID-HEC213>3.0.CO;2-#. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- King M., Elliott C. Legitimate double-think. Lancet. 1993 Mar 13;341(8846):669–672. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(93)90431-f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- King M. Health is a sustainable state. Lancet. 1990 Sep 15;336(8716):664–667. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(90)92156-c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Murray C. J., Lopez A. D. Progress and directions in refining the global burden of disease approach: a response to Williams. Health Econ. 2000 Jan;9(1):69–82. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1050(200001)9:1<69::aid-hec493>3.0.co;2-i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Murray C. J. Quantifying the burden of disease: the technical basis for disability-adjusted life years. Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72(3):429–445. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Murray C. J., Salomon J. A., Mathers C. A critical examination of summary measures of population health. Bull World Health Organ. 2000;78(8):981–994. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Scheper-Hughes N. Social indifference to child death. Lancet. 1991 May 11;337(8750):1144–1147. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(91)92800-h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Weinstein M. C., Stason W. B. Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N Engl J Med. 1977 Mar 31;296(13):716–721. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197703312961304. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]