Literature DB >> 18624605

Considering adaptation in preference elicitations.

Laura J Damschroder1, Brian J Zikmund-Fisher, Peter A Ubel.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Patients with chronic health conditions usually place higher utility on their condition than the public does. One explanation for this discrepancy is that healthy people focus on the negative aspects of the condition without considering their own ability to emotionally adapt to the condition over time. The aim of this randomized experimental study was to test whether people would give higher utility ratings for chronic health conditions when they were encouraged to consider their own ability to adapt to difficult situations before giving their ratings. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Utility ratings for four chronic health conditions.
RESULTS: The authors presented scenarios describing 4 chronic health conditions to 1,117 respondents drawn from a demographically balanced U.S. Internet panel. The adaptation exercise did not influence respondents' valuations. However, utility values increasingly improved with decreasing ratings of how upsetting it would be to live with the condition over time.
CONCLUSION: The authors speculate that asking people to think about adaptation changes their evaluations of what it would feel like to live with chronic illness, but doing so does not change how much they are willing to trade off to avoid that chronic illness.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18624605     DOI: 10.1037/0278-6133.27.3.394

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


  7 in total

1.  Estimating utilities for chronic kidney disease, using SF-36 and SF-12-based measures: challenges in a population of veterans with diabetes.

Authors:  Mangala Rajan; Kuan-Chi Lai; Chin-Lin Tseng; Shirley Qian; Alfredo Selim; Lewis Kazis; Leonard Pogach; Anushua Sinha
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  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

3.  Focusing illusion, adaptation and EQ-5D health state descriptions: the difference between patients and public.

Authors:  Yvette Peeters; Thea P M Vliet Vlieland; Anne M Stiggelbout
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-03-03       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  Compared to what? A joint evaluation method for assessing quality of life.

Authors:  Heather P Lacey; George Loewenstein; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-02-04       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Using mixed methods research to explore the effect of an adaptation exercise on general population valuations of health states.

Authors:  Helen M McTaggart-Cowan; Alicia O'Cathain; Aki Tsuchiya; John E Brazier
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-09-08       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Effect of adaptive abilities on utilities, direct or mediated by mental health?

Authors:  Yvette Peeters; Adelita V Ranchor; Thea P M Vliet Vlieland; Anne M Stiggelbout
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.186

7.  Sick but satisfied: the impact of life and health satisfaction on choice between health scenarios.

Authors:  Paul Dolan; Georgios Kavetsos; Aki Tsuchiya
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 3.883

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.