ECONOMIC VALUATION OF MORTALITY‐RISK REDUCTION: STATED PREFERENCE ESTIMATES FROM THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two internet‐based surveys were conducted with adults aged 35 to 84–885 respondents in the United States and 641 respondents in Canada—to estimate willingness to pay (WTP) for reducing mortality risks through out‐of‐pocket costs for health‐care programs. All respondents were asked a series of choice questions followed by a payment‐card question. Causes of death included cancer and heart attack. Levels of annual mortality‐risk reduction were 1, 2, and 5 in 10,000. Converted to values of statistical life, results were in the range of $4–5 million (2002 U.S. dollars) for the choice‐question results for a 2‐in‐10,000 annual risk reduction for illness‐related mortality. U.S. and Canadian results were similar. The payment‐card results were about 50% lower than the choice‐question results. WTP to reduce mortality risk was essentially the same for cancer and heart attack. The results showed WTP weakly increasing with age, and no evidence of lower WTP for older adults versus middle‐aged adults. ( JEL Q51)
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it