Literature DB >> 11676400

A psychometric analysis of the measurement level of the rating scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble.

K F Cook1, C M Ashton, M M Byrne, B Brody, J Geraci, R B Giesler, M Hanita, J Souchek, N P Wray.   

Abstract

A fundamental assumption of utility-based analyses is that patient utilities for health states can be measured on an equal-interval scale. This assumption, however, has not been widely examined. The objective of this study was to assess whether the rating scale (RS), standard gamble (SG), and time trade-off (TTO) utility elicitation methods function as equal-interval level scales. We wrote descriptions of eight prostate-cancer-related health states. In interviews with patients who had newly diagnosed, advanced prostate cancer, utilities for the health states were elicited using the RS, SG, and TTO methods. At the time of the study, 77 initial and 73 follow-up interviews had. been conducted with a consecutive sample of 77 participants. Using a Rasch model, the boundaries (Thurstone Thresholds) between four equal score sub-ranges of the raw utilities were mapped onto an equal-interval logit scale. The distance between adjacent thresholds in logit units was calculated to determine whether the raw utilities were equal-interval. None of the utility scales functioned as interval-level scales in our sample. Therefore, since interval-level estimates are assumed in utility-based analyses, doubt is raised regarding the validity of findings from previous analyses based on these scales. Our findings need to be replicated in other contexts, and the practical impact of non-interval measurement on utility-based analyses should be explored. If cost-effectiveness analyses are not found to be robust to violations of the assumption that utilities are interval, serious doubt will be cast upon findings from utility-based analyses and upon the wisdom of expending millions in research dollars on utility-based studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11676400     DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(00)00409-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  6 in total

1.  Decision tool to improve the quality of care in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Liana Fraenkel; Ellen Peters; Peter Charpentier; Blair Olsen; Lanette Errante; Robert T Schoen; Valerie Reyna
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 4.794

Review 2.  [Patient-reported and patient-weighted outcomes in ophthalmology].

Authors:  F Scheibler; R P Finger; R Grosselfinger; C-M Dintsios
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.059

3.  Improving the measurement accuracy of the effort-reward imbalance scales.

Authors:  Akizumi Tsutsumi; Noboru Iwata; Takafumi Wakita; Ryuichi Kumagai; Hiroyuki Noguchi; Norito Kawakami
Journal:  Int J Behav Med       Date:  2008

4.  Effects of Probabilities, Adverse Outcomes, and Status Quo on Perceived Riskiness of Medications: Testing Explanatory Hypotheses Concerning Gist, Worry, and Numeracy.

Authors:  Evan A Wilhelms; Liana Fraenkel; Valerie F Reyna
Journal:  Appl Cogn Psychol       Date:  2018-09-01

5.  Development of a tool for eliciting patient priority from among competing cardiovascular disease, medication-symptoms, and fall injury outcomes.

Authors:  Mary E Tinetti; Gail J McAvay; Terri R Fried; JoAnne M Foody; Luann Bianco; Sandra Ginter; Liana Fraenkel
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2008-02-11       Impact factor: 5.562

6.  Incorporating patients' preferences into medical decision making.

Authors:  Liana Fraenkel
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2012-11-06       Impact factor: 3.929

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.