Literature DB >> 22678351

Time trade-off and attitudes toward euthanasia: implications of using 'death' as an anchor in health state valuation.

Liv A Augestad1, Kim Rand-Hendriksen, Knut Stavem, Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Health state values are by convention anchored to 'perfect health' and 'death.' Attitudes toward death may consequently influence the valuations. We used attitudes toward euthanasia (ATE) as a sub-construct for attitudes toward death. We compared the influence on values elicited with time trade-off (TTO), lead-time TTO (LT-TTO) and visual analogue scale (VAS).Since the 'death' anchor is most explicit in TTO, we hypothesized that TTO values would be most influenced by ATE.
METHODS: Respondents valued eight EQ-5D health states with VAS, then TTO (n = 328) or LT-TTO (n = 484). We measured ATE on a scale from -2 (fully disagree) to 2 (fully agree) and used multiple linear regressions to predict VAS, TTO, and LT-TTO values by ATE, sex, age, and education.
RESULTS: A one-point increase on the ATE scale predicted a mean TTO value change of -.113 and LT-TTO change of -.072. Demographic variables, but not ATE, predicted VAS values.
CONCLUSIONS: TTO appears to measure ATE in addition to preferences for health states. Different ways of incorporating death in the valuation may impact substantially on the resulting values. 'Death' is a metaphysically unknown concept, and implications of attitudes toward death should be investigated further to evaluate the appropriateness of using 'death' as an anchor.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22678351     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-012-0192-9

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


  38 in total

1.  To what extent can we explain time trade-off values from other information about respondents?

Authors:  Paul Dolan; Jennifer Roberts
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 4.634

2.  Revisiting United States valuation of EQ-5D states.

Authors:  Benjamin M Craig; Jan J V Busschbach
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2011-07-21       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  The gap effect: discontinuities of preferences around dead.

Authors:  Peep F M Stalmeier; Jan J V Busschbach; Leida M Lamers; Paul F M Krabbe
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.046

4.  US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: development and testing of the D1 valuation model.

Authors:  James W Shaw; Jeffrey A Johnson; Stephen Joel Coons
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Deleting 'irrational' responses from discrete choice experiments: a case of investigating or imposing preferences?

Authors:  Emily Lancsar; Jordan Louviere
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 6.  Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost-utility analysis?

Authors:  David Parkin; Nancy Devlin
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2006-07       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.  Generation of a Danish TTO value set for EQ-5D health states.

Authors:  Kim U Wittrup-Jensen; Jørgen Lauridsen; Claire Gudex; Kjeld M Pedersen
Journal:  Scand J Public Health       Date:  2009-05-01       Impact factor: 3.021

9.  A uniform time trade off method for states better and worse than dead: feasibility study of the 'lead time' approach.

Authors:  Nancy J Devlin; Aki Tsuchiya; Ken Buckingham; Carl Tilling
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.046

10.  The effect of search procedures on utility elicitations.

Authors:  L A Lenert; D J Cher; M K Goldstein; M R Bergen; A Garber
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1998 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.583

View more
  9 in total

1.  A Norwegian 15D value algorithm: proposing a new procedure to estimate 15D value algorithms.

Authors:  Yvonne Anne Michel; Liv Ariane Augestad; Mathias Barra; Kim Rand
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Do Chinese have similar health-state preferences? A comparison of mainland Chinese and Singaporean Chinese.

Authors:  P Wang; M H Li; G G Liu; J Thumboo; N Luo
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2014-09-27

3.  The impact of a belief in life after death on health-state preferences: True difference or artifact?

Authors:  Michał Jakubczyk; Dominik Golicki; Maciej Niewada
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  What should we know about the person behind a TTO?

Authors:  Floortje van Nooten; Jan Busschbach; Michel van Agthoven; Job van Exel; Werner Brouwer
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2018-12

5.  Influenced from the start: anchoring bias in time trade-off valuations.

Authors:  Liv Ariane Augestad; Knut Stavem; Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen; Carl Haakon Samuelsen; Kim Rand-Hendriksen
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-03-26       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  "Back to the future": Influence of beliefs regarding the future on TTO answers.

Authors:  F E van Nooten; N J A van Exel; D Eriksson; W B F Brouwer
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 3.186

7.  Euthanasia, religiosity and the valuation of health states: results from an Irish EQ5D5L valuation study and their implications for anchor values.

Authors:  Luke Barry; Anna Hobbins; Daniel Kelleher; Koonal Shah; Nancy Devlin; Juan Manuel Ramos Goni; Ciaran O'Neill
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2018-07-31       Impact factor: 3.186

8.  Cultural Values: Can They Explain Differences in Health Utilities between Countries?

Authors:  Bram Roudijk; A Rogier T Donders; Peep F M Stalmeier
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Similar responses to EQ-5D-3L by two elicitation methods: visual analogue scale and time trade-off.

Authors:  Xiuying Wang; Lin Zhuo; Yifei Ma; Ting Cai; Aviva Must; Ling Xu; Lang Zhuo
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-05-14       Impact factor: 4.615

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.