Two medical technology researchers argue that patients' own valuations of their health states may result in devaluation of interventions that can help them.

A landmark court case in California determined that a competent adult patient has the right to forgo medical treatment and the patient's autonomy supersedes the state's interest in preserving the patient's life.

Some clinicians and researchers believe that quality-of-life measurements are flawed, and using them in clinical decision making is dangerous.

A controversial Oregon plan used quality-of-life assessments to provide fewer health care services to a larger pool of Medicaid patients.

The conventional quality-adjusted life years approach to resource allocation has greater societal value if it is distributed among many rather than concentrated on a few, assuming that severity of illness is the same.

A medical ethicist outlines the merits and limitations of using quality-adjusted life years measurements in health care decision making.