Literature DB >> 16547782

Eliciting utilities using functional methodology: people's disutilities for the adverse outcomes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Alexandra Gamelin1, María Teresa Muñoz Sastre, Paul Clay Sorum, Etienne Mullet.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the functional methodology of Norman H. Anderson in eliciting utilities for health outcomes.
METHODS: Lay people in Tours, France, rated the undesirability of 40 scenarios of possible outcomes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation on individual linear scales (Study 1) or on a single long scale (Study 2). The outcomes were either 1 of 8 undesirable outcomes, combined with 1 of 5 likelihoods, or else complete recovery, combined with the complementary likelihood.
RESULTS: The mean utilities were consistent with previous studies. On the individual level, the internal coherence of most participants' ratings - defined as the consistency and regularity of the graphic representation of their ratings - improved in Study 1 from their 1st to their 2nd rating. The single scale took less time, but allowed participants to disregard the information about likelihood.
CONCLUSIONS: Functional methodology provides a powerful means of checking on the understanding and consistency of each person whose utilities are elicited.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16547782     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-005-2830-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  24 in total

1.  Validity and interpretation of preference-based measures of health-related quality of life.

Authors:  L Lenert; R M Kaplan
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Eliciting patient disutilities for the adverse outcomes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Authors:  P C Sorum; M T Muñoz Sastre; E Mullet; A Gamelin
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 5.262

3.  Stability of maternal preferences for pediatric health states in the perinatal period and 1 year later.

Authors:  Saroj Saigal; Barbara L Stoskopf; Elizabeth Burrows; David L Streiner; Peter L Rosenbaum
Journal:  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med       Date:  2003-03

4.  Do patients' evaluations of a future health state change when they actually enter that state?

Authors:  H A Llewellyn-Thomas; H J Sutherland; E C Thiel
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Do nonpatients underestimate the quality of life associated with chronic health conditions because of a focusing illusion?

Authors:  P A Ubel; G Loewenstein; J Hershey; J Baron; T Mohr; D A Asch; C Jepson
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2001 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  Effect of assessment method on the discrepancy between judgments of health disorders people have and do not have: a web study.

Authors:  Jonathan Baron; David A Asch; Angela Fagerlin; Christopher Jepson; George Loewenstein; Jason Riis; Margaret G Stineman; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2003 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Methodological issues of patient utility measurement. Experience from two clinical trials.

Authors:  M P Rutten-van Mölken; C H Bakker; E K van Doorslaer; S van der Linden
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Using a treatment-tradeoff method to elicit preferences for the treatment of locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  M D Brundage; J R Davidson; W J Mackillop; D Feldman-Stewart; P Groome
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1998 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Measuring patient preferences by willingness to pay to avoid: the case of acute otitis media.

Authors:  P C Sorum
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1999 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  Deciding about cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The contributions of decision analysis.

Authors:  P C Sorum
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1995-03-13
View more
  2 in total

1.  Assessing hospitalized patients' quality of life from external indices: the perspectives of lay people and health professionals.

Authors:  Maria Teresa Muñoz Sastre; Sylvie Castanié; Paul Clay Sorum; Etienne Mullet
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-05-06       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  What utility scores do mental health service users, healthcare professionals and members of the general public attribute to different health states? A co-produced mixed methods online survey.

Authors:  Chris Flood; Sally Barlow; Alan Simpson; Amanda Burls; Amy Price; Martin Cartwright; Stefano Brini
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.