Professor Emily Lancsar

PhD Economics, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; MEc, University of Sydney; Post Grad Dip Health Econ & Evaluation, Monash; BEc, ANU; BA (Asian Studies), ANU
Head, Department of Health Services Research and Policy


Professor Emily Lancsar is Head of the Department of Health Services Research and Policy and Associate Dean (Policy and Practice) in the College of Health and Medicine at the ANU. She is an economist with particular interests in understanding and modelling choice, preferences and behaviour of key decision makers in the health sector, priority setting in the health system, economic evaluation and policy analysis.

Emily holds a number of current and past ARC, MRFF, NHMRC, MRC, ESRC, NIHR and EU funded grants and fellowships. She is a member of a number of government advisory committees including the Medical Services Advisory Committee (MSAC), the Economic Sub-Committee of MSAC and the Economic Sub-Committee of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. She is an Associate Editor of Health Economics and a past Vice President of the Australian Health Economics Society.

Prior to joining ANU, Emily was an Associate Professor in the Centre for Health Economics at Monash University. Joining Monash in 2011 represented a return to Australia after spending more than 7 years at Newcastle University in the UK where she held Senior Lecturer and Lecturer positions in the Department of Economics. Emily also previously worked at CHERE in Sydney and at the Federal Department of Health.


Research interests

  • Health Economics
  • Health Services Research
  • Behavioural economics
  • Discrete choice experiments
  • Discrete choice modelling
  • Priority setting in resource allocation



  • Blake, M, Dubey, S, Swait, J et al. 2020, 'An integrated modelling approach examining the influence of goals, habit and learning on choice using visual attention data', Journal of Business Research, vol. 117, pp. 44-57.
  • Lancsar, E, Gu, Y, Gyrd-Hansen, D et al. 2020, 'The relative value of different QALY types', Journal of Health Economics, vol. 70, no. March 2020, p. 102303.
  • Ratcliffe, J, Kaambwa, B, Hutchinson, C et al. 2020, 'Empirical Investigation of Ranking vs Best-Worst Scaling Generated Preferences for Attributes of Quality of Life: One and the Same or Differentiable?', Patient, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 307-315.
  • Ratcliffe, J, Cameron, I, Lancsar, E et al. 2019, 'Developing a new quality of life instrument with older people for economic evaluation in aged care: Study protocol', BMJ Open, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. -.
  • Blake, M, Backholer, K, Lancsar, E et al. 2019, 'Investigating business outcomes of healthy food retail strategies: A systematic scoping review', Obesity Reviews, vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 1384-1399.
  • Yeo, V, Dowsey, M, Alguera-Lara, V et al. 2019, 'Antipsychotic choice: understanding shared decision-making among doctors and patients [IN PRESS]', Journal of Mental Health, vol. 0, no. 0.
  • Blake, M, Lancsar, E, Peeters, A et al 2019, 'Sugar-sweetened beverage price elasticities in a hypothetical convenience store', Social Science and Medicine, vol. 225, no. March 2019, pp. 98-107.
  • Ford, L, Haywood, P, Kirk, M et al 2019, 'Cost of Salmonella Infections in Australia, 2015', Journal of Food Protection, vol. 82, no. 9, pp. 1607-1614.
  • Khadka, J, Kwon, J, Petrou, S et al 2019, 'Mind the (inter-rater) gap. An investigation of self-reported versus proxy-reported assessments in the derivation of childhood utility values for economic evaluation: A systematic review', Social Science and Medicine, vol. 240, pp. 1-36.
  • Pickles, K, Lancsar, E, Seymour, J et al 2019, 'Accounts from developers of generic health state utility instruments explain why they produce different QALYs: A qualitative study', Social Science and Medicine, vol. 240, no. 2019, pp. -.
  • Lancsar, E & Swait, J 2018, 'Reconceptualising the External Validity of Discrete Choice Experiments', PharmacoEconomics, vol. 32, no. 10, pp. 951-965.
  • Ghijben, P, Gu, Y, Lancsar, E et al 2018, 'Revealed and Stated Preferences of Decision Makers for Priority Setting in Health Technology Assessment: A Systematic Review', PharmacoEconomics, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 323-340.
  • De Brun, A, Flynn, D, Ternent, L et al 2018, 'Factors that influence clinicians’ decisions to offer intravenous alteplase in acute ischemic stroke patients with uncertain treatment indication: Results of a discrete choice experiment
    ', International Journal of Stroke, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 74-82pp.
  • Blake, M, Lancsar, E, Peeters, A et al 2018, 'The effect of sugar-sweetened beverage price increases and educational messages on beverage purchasing behavior among adults', Appetite, vol. 126, pp. 156-162.
  • De Brun, A, Flynn, D, Ternent, L et al 2018, 'A novel design process for selection of attributes for inclusion in discrete choice experiments: case study exploring variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke', BMC Health Services Research, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1-14pp.
  • Blake, M, Peeters, A, Lancsar, E et al 2018, 'Retailer-Led Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Price Increase Reduces Purchases in a Hospital Convenience Store in Melbourne, Australia: A Mixed Methods Evaluation
    ', Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, vol. 118, no. 6, pp. 1027-1036pp.
  • de Bekker-Grob, E, Veldwijk, J, Jonker, M et al 2018, 'The impact of vaccination and patient characteristics on influenza vaccination uptake of elderly people: A discrete choice experiment
    ', Vaccine, vol. 36, no. 11, pp. 1467-1476pp.
  • Craig, B, Lancsar, E, Muhlbacher, A et al 2017, 'Health Preference Research: An Overview
    ', Patient, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 507-510pp.
  • Lancsar, E, Fiebig, D & Hole, A 2017, 'Discrete Choice Experiments: A Guide to Model Specification, Estimation and Software', PharmacoEconomics, vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 697-716pp.
  • Ratcliffe, J, Lancsar, E, Walker, R et al 2017, 'Understanding what matters: An exploratory study to investigate the views of the general public for priority setting criteria in health care
    ', Health Policy, vol. 121, no. 6, pp. 653-662pp.
  • Mulhern, B, Norman, R, Lorgelly, P et al 2017, 'Is Dimension Order Important when Valuing Health States Using Discrete Choice Experiments Including Duration?
    ', PharmacoEconomics, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 439-451pp.
  • Ratcliffe, J, Lancsar, E, Flint, T et al 2017, 'Does one size fit all? Assessing the preferences of older and younger people for attributes of quality of life', Quality of Life Research, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 299-309pp.
  • Mason, H, van Exel, J, Baker, R et al 2016, 'From representing views to representativeness of views: Illustrating a new (Q2S) approach in the context of health care priority setting in nine European countries
    ', Social Science and Medicine, vol. 166, pp. 205-213pp.
  • Ride, J & Lancsar, E 2016, 'Women’s Preferences for Treatment of Perinatal Depression and Anxiety: A Discrete Choice Experiment', PLOS ONE (Public Library of Science), vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 1-23pp.
  • Gu, Y, Lancsar, E, Ghijben, P et al 2015, 'Attributes and weights in health care priority setting: A systematic review of what counts and to what extent
    ', Social Science and Medicine, vol. 146, pp. 41-52pp.
  • Kaambwa, B, Gill, L, McCaffrey, N et al 2015, 'An empirical comparison of the OPQoL-Brief, EQ-5D-3 L and ASCOT in a community dwelling population of older people', Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, vol. 13, pp. 1-17pp.
  • Kaambwa, B, Lancsar, E, McCaffrey, N et al 2015, 'Investigating consumers' and informal carers' views and preferences for consumer directed care: A discrete choice experiment', Social Science and Medicine, vol. 140, pp. 81-94pp.
  • Wortley, S, Tong, A, Lancsar, E et al 2015, 'Public preferences for engagement in Health Technology Assessment decision-making: protocol of a mixed methods study', BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, vol. 15, pp. 1-7pp.
  • Pennington, M, Baker, R, Brouwer, W et al 2015, 'Comparing WTP Values of Different Types of QALY Gain Elicited from the General Public', Health Economics, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 280-293pp.
  • De Brún, A, Flynn, D, Joyce, K et al. 2014, 'Understanding clinicians’ decisions to offer intravenous thrombolytic treatment to patients with acute ischaemic stroke: a protocol for a discrete choice experiment', BMJ Open, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 1-8.
  • Ratcliffe, J, Lancsar, E, Luszcz, M et al 2014, 'A health economic model for the development and evaluation of innovations in aged care: an application to consumer-directed care—study protocol', BMJ Open, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 1-6.
  • Milte, R, Ratcliffe, J, Chen, G et al 2014, 'Cognitive overload? An exploration of the potential impact of cognitive functioning in discrete choice experiments with older people in health care', Value in Health, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 655-659.
  • Whitty, J, Lancsar, E, Rixon, K et al 2014, 'A Systematic Review of Stated Preference Studies Reporting Public Preferences for Healthcare Priority Setting', Patient, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 365-386.
  • Ghijben, P, Lancsar, E & Zavarsek, S 2014, 'Preferences for Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation: a Best–Best Discrete Choice Experiment', PharmacoEconomics, vol. 32, no. 11, pp. 1115-1127.
  • Milte, R, Walker, R, Luszcz, M et al 2014, 'How Important Is Health Status in Defining Quality of Life for Older People? An Exploratory Study of the Views of Older South Australians', Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 73-84.
  • Lancsar, E & Burge, P 2014, 'Choice modelling research in health economics', in Stephane Hess, Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, Cheltenham, UK, pp. 375-687pp.
  • Johnson, F, Lancsar, E, Marshall, D et al. 2013, 'Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: Report of the ISPOR conjoint analysis experimental design good research practices task force', Value in Health, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 3-13.
  • Lancsar, E, Louviere, J, Donaldson, C et al 2013, 'Best worst discrete choice experiments in health: Methods and an application', Social Science and Medicine, vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 74-82.
  • Baker, R, Chilton, S, Donaldson, C et al 2011, 'Searchers vs surveyors in estimating the monetary value of a QALY: resolving a nasty dilemma for NICE', Health Economics, Policy and Law, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 435-447.
  • Donaldson, C, Baker, R, Mason, H et al 2011, 'The social value of a QALY: raising the bar or barring the raise?', BMC Health Services Research, vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 1-8.
  • Lancsar, E, Wildman, J, Donaldson, C et al 2011, 'Deriving distributional weights for QALYs through discrete choice experiments', Journal of Health Economics, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 466-478.
  • Baker, R, Bateman, I, Donaldson, C et al 2010, 'Weighting and valuing quality-adjusted life-years using stated preference methods: preliminary results from the Social Value of a QALY Project', Health Technology Assessment, vol. 14, no. 27, pp. 1-162.
  • Kenny, P, Hall, J, King, M et al 2009, 'Sources of Variation in the Costs of Health Care for Asthma Patients in Australia', Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 133-140.
  • Louviere, J & Lancsar, E 2009, 'Choice experiments in health: the good, the bad, the ugly and toward a brighter future', Health Economics, Policy and Law, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 527-546.
  • Lancsar, E & Louviere, J 2008, 'Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making', PharmacoEconomics, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 661-667.
  • Lancsar, E, Hall, J, King, M et al 2007, 'Using discrete choice experiments to investigate subject preferences for preventive asthma medication', Respirology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 127-136.
  • Lancsar, E, Louviere, J & Flynn, T 2007, 'Several methods to investigate relative attribute impact in stated preference experiments', Social Science and Medicine, vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 1738-1753.
  • King, M, Hall, J, Lancsar, E et al 2007, 'Patient preferences for managing asthma: results from a discrete choice experiment', Health Economics, vol. 16, no. 7, pp. 703-717.
  • Lancsar, E & Louviere, J 2006, 'Deleting ‘irrational’ responses from discrete choice experiments: a case of investigating or imposing preferences?', Health Economics, vol. 15, no. 8, pp. 797-811.
  • Kenny, P, Lancsar, E, Hall, J et al 2005, 'The individual and health sector costs of asthma: the first year of a longitudinal study in New South Wales', Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 429-435.
  • Lancsar, E & Donaldson, C 2005, 'Discrete choice experiments in health econimics', European Journal of Health Economics, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 314-316.
  • Shanahan, M, Lancsar, E, Haas, M et al 2004, 'Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the New South Wales Adult Drug Court Program', Evaluation Review, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 3-27.
  • Lancsar, E & Savage, E 2004, 'Deriving welfare measures from discrete choice experiments: a response to Ryan and Santos Silva', Health Economics, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 919-924.
  • Lancsar, E & Savage, E 2004, 'Deriving welfare measures from discrete choice experiments: inconsistency between current methods and random utility and welfare theory', Health Economics, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 901-907.
  • Gool, K, Lancsar, E, Viney, R et al 2002, 'Diagnosis and prognosis of Australia&s health information for evidence-based policy', Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 40-45.
  • Viney, R, Lancsar, E & Louviere, J 2002, 'Discrete choice experiments to measure consumer preferences for health and healthcare', Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 319-326.


Current PhD Students

Lynne Pezullo, PhD Candidate. Cost of illness: potential guidelines for best practice methodology and a novel Australian application.


Thi Hong Thao, PhD Candidate, Monash University, Pharmacists workforce preferences and choices, 2017 – current.

Jing Jing Li, PhD Candidate, Monash University, Decision making in health technology assessment, 2016- current.

Peter Ghijben, PhD Candidate, Monash University, Economic studies in health technology assessment, 2016- current.

Miranda Blake, PhD Candidate, Monash University, Pricing interventions to reduce population sugar sweetened beverage consumption, 2015- current.