Literature DB >> 23224226

Maximal endurable time states and the standard gamble: more preference reversals.

P F M Stalmeier1, A L Verheijen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The time trade off (TTO) method is not sensitive to maximal endurable time preferences, as preference reversals occur. The standard gamble (SG) method has not been tested regarding its sensitivity to maximal endurable time preferences.
OBJECTIVE: This study investigates whether preference reversals occur for the SG method as well.
METHODS: Fifty-nine respondents stated for several migraine health states their preference for living 10 or 20 years in that state. A migraine state was selected for which a respondent preferred 10-20 years, a maximal endurable time preference. Two probability equivalent gambles were obtained for the migraine states lasting 10 and 20 years, respectively. Preference reversals occurred when the gamble, equivalent to the longer duration, was preferred to the gamble equivalent to the shorter duration.
RESULTS: Out of 59 respondents, 48 had maximal endurable time preferences. Of these 48 respondents, 34 (71%) showed a preference reversal. This percentage differed significantly from chance, that is 50% (P = 0.004), indicating that preference reversals occurred reliably.
CONCLUSION: The observed reversal rate for the standard gamble is similar to rates observed previously with the TTO method. Utility measurement of poor health states is problematic, both with the TTO and standard gamble methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23224226     DOI: 10.1007/s10198-012-0445-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Health Econ        ISSN: 1618-7598


  20 in total

1.  EuroQol--a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life.

Authors: 
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 2.980

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.  Differences in health values among patients, family members, and providers for outcomes in schizophrenia.

Authors:  L A Lenert; J Ziegler; T Lee; R Sommi; R Mahmoud
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  Valuing health states: a comparison of methods.

Authors:  P Dolan; C Gudex; P Kind; A Williams
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 3.883

5.  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

Review 6.  Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life.

Authors:  G W Torrance
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

Review 7.  Patient preference for cancer therapy: an overview of measurement approaches.

Authors:  A M Stiggelbout; J C de Haes
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2001-01-01       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Assessing values for health: numeracy matters.

Authors:  S Woloshin; L M Schwartz; M Moncur; S Gabriel; A N Tosteson
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2001 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Discrepancies between chained and classic utilities induced by anchoring with occasional adjustments.

Authors:  Peep F M Stalmeier
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2002 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  The standard gamble showed better construct validity than the time trade-off.

Authors:  Milo A Puhan; Holger J Schünemann; Eric Wong; Lauren Griffith; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2007-05-17       Impact factor: 6.437

View more
  1 in total

1.  Health state utilities for migraine based on attack frequency: a time trade-off study.

Authors:  Fanni Rencz; Valentin Brodszky; Márta Péntek; Dániel Bereczki; László Gulácsi
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2014-08-10       Impact factor: 3.307

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.