Literature DB >> 10812318

Self-report measures of patient utility: should we trust them?

M Hanita1.   

Abstract

As self-reports, measures of patient utility are susceptible to the effects of cognitive biases in patients. This article presents often overlooked problems in these measures by outlining cognitive processes involved in patient self-report. It is argued that these measures: 1) require overly complex mental operations; 2) fail to elicit thoughtful response by default; 3) may be biased by patients' mood; 4) are affected by both researchers' choice of measurement instruments and patients' choice of judgment strategies; 5) tend to reflect the disproportionate influence of patients' values that happen to be recallable at the time of measurement; and 6) are affected by patients' fear of regret. It is suggested that solutions for these problems should involve: a) improving the methods of administration; b) developing measures that are less taxing to patients; and c) redefining the concept of patient utility as judged, as opposed to retrieved, evaluation. Published by 2000 Elsevier Science Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10812318     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00205-x

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


  7 in total

Review 1.  Health-related quality of life and hearing aids: a tutorial.

Authors:  Harvey B Abrams; Theresa H Chisolm; Rachel McArdle
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2005

2.  Psychometric evaluation of the multiple sclerosis impact scale (MSIS-29) for proxy use.

Authors:  F A H van der Linden; J J Kragt; M Klein; H M van der Ploeg; C H Polman; B M J Uitdehaag
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 10.154

3.  Longitudinal screening and management of fatigue, pain, and emotional distress associated with cancer therapy.

Authors:  Zeeshan Butt; Lynne I Wagner; Jennifer L Beaumont; Judith A Paice; Joshua L Straus; Amy H Peterman; George Carro; Jamie H Von Roenn; Dan Shevrin; David Cella
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2007-07-03       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  The long-term outcome after severe trauma of children in Flanders (Belgium): a population-based cohort study using the International Classification of Functioning--related outcome score.

Authors:  Patrick Van de Voorde; Marc Sabbe; Roula Tsonaka; Dimitris Rizopoulos; Paul Calle; Annick De Jaeger; Emmanuel Lesaffre; Dirk Matthys
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2010-08-10       Impact factor: 3.183

5.  Overcoming inherent problems of preference-based techniques for measuring health benefits: an empirical study in the context of kidney transplantation.

Authors:  Nick Kontodimopoulos; Dimitris Niakas
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-01-14       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 6.  Use of POCUS in Chest Pain and Dyspnea in Emergency Department: What Role Could It Have?

Authors:  Andrea Piccioni; Laura Franza; Federico Rosa; Federica Manca; Giulia Pignataro; Lucia Salvatore; Benedetta Simeoni; Marcello Candelli; Marcello Covino; Francesco Franceschi
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-03

7.  Validation of a general measure of treatment satisfaction, the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), using a national panel study of chronic disease.

Authors:  Mark J Atkinson; Anusha Sinha; Steven L Hass; Shoshana S Colman; Ritesh N Kumar; Meryl Brod; Clayton R Rowland
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2004-02-26       Impact factor: 3.186

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.