Literature DB >> 21517837

Empirical validation of patient versus population preferences in calculating QALYs.

Eva-Julia Weyler1, Afschin Gandjour.   

Abstract

A fundamental assumption of the quality-adjusted life year model is mutual utility independence between life years and health status. However, this assumption may not hold for severe health states: living in a severe health state may cause disutility beyond a so-called maximal endurable time (MET). It is unknown, however, whether persons without experience of a disease, who are often used in health state valuation exercises, account for MET. Using data from 159 respondents from two convenience samples in Germany who were presented a health state description of depression, this study shows that persons without experience of depression had a lower rate of MET than persons with a history of depression. Furthermore, they had more preference reversals in case of MET, thus violating a fundamental principle of rational choice theory. While these findings suggest that severe health states should be assessed by patients rather than the community, confirmation in additional studies outside Germany and based on other health-state valuation techniques and diseases is recommended. © Health Research and Educational Trust.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21517837      PMCID: PMC3207192          DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01268.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Serv Res        ISSN: 0017-9124            Impact factor:   3.402


  22 in total

1.  Are health states "timeless"? The case of the standard gamble method.

Authors:  M V Bala; L L Wood; G A Zarkin; E C Norton; A Gafni; B J O'Brien
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  The validity of time trade-off values in calculating QALYs: constant proportional time trade-off versus the proportional heuristic.

Authors:  Paul Dolan; Peep Stalmeier
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Limitations of the methods used for calculating quality-adjusted life-year values.

Authors:  Gérard Duru; Jean Paul Auray; Ariel Béresniak; Michel Lamure; Abby Paine; Nicolas Nicoloyannis
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Are health states 'timeless'? A case study of an acute condition: post-chemotherapy nausea and vomiting.

Authors:  Duska M Franic; Dev S Pathak; Amiram Gafni
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.431

5.  Importance of preference reversals in the valuation of health and healthcare.

Authors:  Adam Oliver; Corinna Sorenson
Journal:  Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.217

6.  Exploring challenges to TTO utilities: valuing states worse than dead.

Authors:  Angela Robinson; Anne Spencer
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.046

7.  On the assessment of preferences for health and duration: maximal endurable time and better than dead preferences.

Authors:  Peep F M Stalmeier; Leida M Lamers; Jan J V Busschbach; Paul F M Krabbe
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Whose preferences count?

Authors:  P Dolan
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1999 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  The longitudinal relation between chronic diseases and depression in older persons in the community: the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam.

Authors:  M Isabella Bisschop; Didi M W Kriegsman; Dorly J H Deeg; Aartjan T F Beekman; Willem van Tilburg
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 6.437

10.  Health state valuations of patients and the general public analytically compared: a meta-analytical comparison of patient and population health state utilities.

Authors:  Yvette Peeters; Anne M Stiggelbout
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2009-09-10       Impact factor: 5.725

View more
  1 in total

1.  Relative importance of the EQ-5D five dimensions among patients with chronic diseases in South Korea - a comparison with the general population preference weights.

Authors:  Jihyung Hong
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 3.186

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.