Literature DB >> 17100497

Misremembering colostomies? Former patients give lower utility ratings than do current patients.

Dylan M Smith1, Ryan L Sherriff, Laura Damschroder, George Loewenstein, Peter A Ubel.   

Abstract

Community members often evaluate health conditions more negatively than do the patients who have them. The authors investigated whether experience with a health condition reduces this discrepancy by surveying colostomy patients by mail (n = 195), some of whom (n = 100) had their colostomies reversed and normal bowel function restored. The authors also surveyed a community sample recruited via the Internet (n = 567). They then compared all 3 groups' utility value for life with a colostomy by using the time trade-off utility measure and by examining ratings of current quality of life. Despite having direct experience with the health condition, former colostomy patients provided much lower utility valuations than did current patients. In fact, their valuations were similar to those given by a community sample. Rather than accurately remembering their actual experiences with colostomies, the former patients may have applied a theory of how colostomies had influenced their lives; this is consistent with other research on theory driven recall bias. Copyright 2006 APA, all rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17100497     DOI: 10.1037/0278-6133.25.6.688

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Psychol        ISSN: 0278-6133            Impact factor:   4.267


  22 in total

1.  Beneficent persuasion: techniques and ethical guidelines to improve patients' decisions.

Authors:  J S Swindell; Amy L McGuire; Scott D Halpern
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2010 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.166

2.  The Subjective Well-Being Method of Valuation: An Application to General Health Status.

Authors:  Timothy T Brown
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-03-11       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Health State Utility Values for Ileostomies and Colostomies: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Fahima Dossa; Jonathan Josse; Sergio A Acuna; Nancy N Baxter
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  On the Usefulness of Narratives: An Interdisciplinary Review and Theoretical Model.

Authors:  Victoria A Shaffer; Elizabeth S Focella; Andrew Hathaway; Laura D Scherer; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2018-04-19

5.  Developing a Rational Approach to Tobacco Use Treatment in Pulmonary Practice: A Review of the Biological Basis of Nicotine Addiction.

Authors:  Frank T Leone; Sarah Evers-Casey
Journal:  Clin Pulm Med       Date:  2012-03-01

Review 6.  Patient expectations and patient-reported outcomes in surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jennifer Waljee; Evan P McGlinn; Erika Davis Sears; Kevin C Chung
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2013-12-16       Impact factor: 3.982

Review 7.  Affective forecasting: an unrecognized challenge in making serious health decisions.

Authors:  Jodi Halpern; Robert M Arnold
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-07-30       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Priority setting and patient adaptation to disability and illness: outcomes of a qualitative study.

Authors:  John McKie; Rosalind Hurworth; Bradley Shrimpton; Jeff Richardson; Catherine Bell
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2014-09

9.  How bad is depression? Preference score estimates from depressed patients and the general population.

Authors:  Jeffrey M Pyne; John C Fortney; Shanti Tripathi; David Feeny; Peter Ubel; John Brazier
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-04-21       Impact factor: 3.402

10.  Sensitivity to disgust, stigma, and adjustment to life with a colostomy.

Authors:  Dylan M Smith; George Loewenstein; Paul Rozin; Ryan L Sherriff; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  J Res Pers       Date:  2007-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.