The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures
Abstract
This paper describes four approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures: the delta, Fieller, Krinsky Robb and bootstrap methods. The accuracy of the various methods is compared using a number of simulated datasets. In the majority of the scenarios considered all four methods are found to be reasonably accurate as well as yielding similar results. The delta method is the most accurate when the data is well‐conditioned, while the bootstrap is more robust to noisy data and misspecification of the model. These conclusions are illustrated by empirical data from a study of willingness to pay for a reduction in waiting time for a general practitioner appointment in which all the methods produce fairly similar confidence intervals. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
An Introduction to the Bootstrap
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1993) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-4541-9 · Cited by 21,230
Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife
Efron, B. (1979) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1176344552 · Cited by 17,602
Better Bootstrap Confidence Intervals
Efron, B. (1987) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1987.10478410 · Cited by 3,364
Analysis of Covariance with Qualitative Data
Chamberlain, G. (1980) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2297110 · Cited by 2,629
On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities
Krinsky, I., & Robb, A. L. (1986) · The Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.2307/1924536 · Cited by 2,374
Some Problems in Interval Estimation
Fieller, E. C. (1954) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1954.tb00159.x · Cited by 1,139
Mooney, C., & Duval, R. (1993) · doi:10.4135/9781412983532 · Cited by 893
Ryan, M., & Gerard, K. (2003) · PubMed · Cited by 644
On the ratio of two correlated normal random variables
HINKLEY, D. V. (1969) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/56.3.635 · Cited by 633
THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE INDEX IN A NORMAL BIVARIATE POPULATION
FIELLER, E. C. (1932) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/24.3-4.428 · Cited by 349
Cited by
Bridges, J. F. P., Hauber, A. B., Marshall, D., Lloyd, A., Prosser, L. A., Regier, D. A., Johnson, F. R., & Mauskopf, J. (2011) · Value in Health · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013 · Cited by 2,029
Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making: A User??s Guide
Lancsar, E., & Louviere, J. (2008) · PharmacoEconomics · doi:10.2165/00019053-200826080-00004 · Cited by 1,707
Checherita-Westphal, C., & Rother, P. (2012) · European Economic Review · doi:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2012.06.007 · Cited by 732
Surveillance for ocular hypertension: an evidence synthesis and economic evaluation.
Burr, J., Botello-Pinzon, P., Takwoingi, Y., Hernández, R., Vazquez-Montes, M., Elders, A., Asaoka, R., Banister, K., van der Schoot, J., Fraser, C., et al. (2012) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta16290 · Cited by 180
lclogit2: An enhanced command to fit latent class conditional logit models
Yoo, H. I. (2020) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x20931003 · Cited by 122
Metadata
- Authors
- Hole, A. R.
- Venue
- Health Economics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-01-22
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 827-840
- ISSN
- 1057-9230 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1050
- OpenAlex
- W2147780192
- Cited by
- 600
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 31.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hec.1197
- The paper
- Hole, A. R. (2007). A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures. Health Economics. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1197
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
