Literature DB >> 10526998

Are health states "timeless"? The case of the standard gamble method.

M V Bala1, L L Wood, G A Zarkin, E C Norton, A Gafni, B J O'Brien.   

Abstract

The standard gamble method, as currently recommended for use in health care program evaluation, provides an individual's preference score or "utility weight" for living in a given health state for the rest of the individual's life. Many researchers interpret this value as a time-independent or "timeless" one and order health states on a scale of zero (death) to one (full health), regardless of the time spent in the health state. This article examines whether preference scores for a severe pain health state are "timeless," or in other words whether the utility independence assumption is satisfied. Our study results suggest that for the majority of respondents, the preference scores are not independent of time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10526998     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00074-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  14 in total

1.  Empirical validation of patient versus population preferences in calculating QALYs.

Authors:  Eva-Julia Weyler; Afschin Gandjour
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-04-21       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 2.  Methods for measuring temporary health States for cost-utility analyses.

Authors:  Davene R Wright; Eve Wittenberg; J Shannon Swan; Rebecca A Miksad; Lisa A Prosser
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Estimating utility values for vesicoureteral reflux in the general public using an online tool.

Authors:  Jessica C Lloyd; Talitha Yen; Ricardo Pietrobon; John S Wiener; Sherry S Ross; Paul J Kokorowski; Caleb P Nelson; Jonathan C Routh
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 1.830

4.  Utility scores for vesicoureteral reflux and anti-reflux surgery.

Authors:  Caleb P Nelson; Jonathan C Routh; Tanya Logvinenko; Ilina Rosoklija; Paul J Kokorowski; Lisa A Prosser; Mark A Schuster
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2015-04-30       Impact factor: 1.830

5.  Can differences in breast cancer utilities explain disparities in breast cancer care?

Authors:  Mark D Schleinitz; Dina DePalo; Jeffrey Blume; Michael Stein
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2006-09-01       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Comparison of the quality of life between patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and healthy controls.

Authors:  Lukas Jyuhn-Hsiarn Lee; Chih-Wen Chung; Yu-Yin Chang; Yung-Chie Lee; Chih-Hsin Yang; Saou-Hsing Liou; Pang-Hsiang Liu; Jung-Der Wang
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-10-17       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Preferences for health outcomes associated with Group A Streptococcal disease and vaccination.

Authors:  Grace M Lee; Joshua A Salomon; Charlene Gay; James K Hammitt
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 3.186

8.  The duration effect: a link between TTO and VAS values.

Authors:  Benjamin M Craig
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 9.  Measuring health preferences for use in cost-utility and cost-benefit analyses of interventions in children: theoretical and methodological considerations.

Authors:  Lisa A Prosser; James K Hammitt; Ron Keren
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 10.  Valuing children's health: a comparison of cost-utility analyses for adult and paediatric health interventions in the US.

Authors:  Joseph A Ladapo; Peter J Neumann; Ron Keren; Lisa A Prosser
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.