OBJECTIVES: The principal of QALY is sometimes referred to as “A QALY is a QALY is a QALY”, which means all QALYs have the same value, while QALYs may not fully reflect public preferences. If the use of QALYs in decision making proves beneficial but insufficient, what other factors should be taken into consideration simultaneously? METHODS: We conducted a face-to-face survey using a discrete choice method to measure societal medical care preferences. The profiles of assumed patients consisted of the following four factors: (a) age (young or elderly patient); (b) objective of care (treatment or prevention); (c) severity of health state (severe or mild); and (d) past experience of receiving care (yes or no). These factors were orthogonally combined to construct 16 patient profiles. All assumed medical care had the same ICER (cost per QALY). Respondents were randomly assigned to two of the 16 profiles and asked which one of the patients should preferentially receive treatment from a societal point of view, given a limited medical resource. Respondents were stratified by age and sex. RESULTS: A total of 1091 responses were collected from 50 sites across Japan. The most preferred factor was “younger patient (a)”, followed by “treatment (b)” and “severe health state (c)”, which had the same degree of preference. No statistical significance was found for “no past experience of care (d)”. Public preference for medical care for elderly patients increased with increasing age. University-graduated people tended to prioritize care for patients who are younger and in severer conditions.  CONCLUSIONS: Our survey revealed that public medical care preferences are influenced by factors such as age, even with the same cost per QALY. Based on an economic evaluation, age is an important factor for decision-making that reflects societal preferences.