Literature DB >> 24384738

Anchoring vignettes for health comparisons: an analysis of response consistency.

Nicole Au1, Paula K Lorgelly.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Self-rated health (SRH) is widely used to measure and compare the health status of different groups of individuals. However, SRH can suffer from heterogeneity in reporting styles, making health comparisons problematic. Anchoring vignettes is a promising technique for improving inter-group comparisons of SRH. A key identifying assumption of the approach is response consistency-that respondents rate themselves using the same underlying response scale that they rate the vignettes. Despite growing research into response consistency, it remains unclear how respondents rate vignettes and why respondents may not assess vignettes and themselves consistently.
METHOD: Vignettes for the EQ-5D-5L were developed and included in an online survey. In-depth interviews were conducted with participants following survey completion. Response consistency was examined through qualitative analysis of the interview responses and quantitative coding of participants' thought processes.
RESULTS: Our analysis showed that anchoring vignettes for the EQ-5D-5L is feasible, but that response consistency may not hold for some participants. Respondents are more likely to rate their own health and vignettes in the same way if presented with overall health state vignettes than single health dimension vignettes, and if they imagined themselves in the health state of the hypothetical individual.
CONCLUSION: This research highlights opportunities to improve the design of anchoring vignettes in order to enhance response consistency. It additionally provides new evidence on the feasibility of employing anchoring vignettes for the EQ-5D-5L, which is promising for future work to address reporting heterogeneity in the EQ-5D-5L.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24384738     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-013-0615-2

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


  39 in total

1.  Swedish population health-related quality of life results using the EQ-5D.

Authors:  K Burström; M Johannesson; F Diderichsen
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group.

Authors:  R Rabin; F de Charro
Journal:  Ann Med       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 4.709

Review 3.  Health status assessment methods for adults: past accomplishments and future challenges.

Authors:  C A McHorney
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 21.981

4.  Are Americans Really Less Happy With Their Incomes?

Authors:  Arie Kapteyn; James P Smith; Arie van Soest
Journal:  Rev Income Wealth       Date:  2013-03-01

5.  Does reporting heterogeneity bias the measurement of health disparities?

Authors:  Teresa Bago d'Uva; Eddy Van Doorslaer; Maarten Lindeboom; Owen O'Donnell
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 6.  Understanding inconsistencies in patient-reported outcomes after spine treatment: response shift phenomena.

Authors:  Carolyn E Schwartz; Joel A Finkelstein
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2009-07-01       Impact factor: 4.166

7.  Are anchoring vignettes ratings sensitive to vignette age and sex?

Authors:  Hendrik Jürges; Joachim Winter
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2011-11-15       Impact factor: 3.046

8.  What is self-rated health and why does it predict mortality? Towards a unified conceptual model.

Authors:  Marja Jylhä
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2009-06-10       Impact factor: 4.634

9.  Population health status in China: EQ-5D results, by age, sex and socio-economic status, from the National Health Services Survey 2008.

Authors:  Sun Sun; Jiaying Chen; Magnus Johannesson; Paul Kind; Ling Xu; Yaoguang Zhang; Kristina Burström
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  The association of body mass index and health-related quality of life in the general population: data from the 2003 Health Survey of England.

Authors:  F Søltoft; M Hammer; N Kragh
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-10-08       Impact factor: 4.147

View more
  13 in total

1.  In Pursuit of Anchoring Vignettes That Work: Evaluating Generality Versus Specificity in Vignette Texts.

Authors:  Hanna Grol-Prokopczyk
Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci       Date:  2017-12-15       Impact factor: 4.077

Review 2.  Identifying the components of clinical vignettes describing Alzheimer's disease or other dementias: a scoping review.

Authors:  Harkanwal Randhawa; Aalim Jiwa; Mark Oremus
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 2.796

3.  Development of Clinical Vignettes to Describe Alzheimer's Disease Health States: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Mark Oremus; Feng Xie; Kathryn Gaebel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Anchoring Vignettes in EQ-5D-5L Questionnaire: Validation of a New Instrument.

Authors:  Danila Azzolina; Clara Minto; Stefania Boschetto; Matteo Martinato; Barbara Bauce; Sabino Iliceto; Dario Gregori
Journal:  Open Nurs J       Date:  2017-10-31

5.  Testing the construct validity of a health transition question using vignette-guided patient ratings of health.

Authors:  Michael M Ward; Jinxiang Hu; Lori C Guthrie; Maria Alba
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 3.186

6.  An exploration of differences between Japan and two European countries in the self-reporting and valuation of pain and discomfort on the EQ-5D.

Authors:  Yan Feng; Mike Herdman; Floortje van Nooten; Charles Cleeland; David Parkin; Shunya Ikeda; Ataru Igarashi; Nancy J Devlin
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-03-25       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Does reporting behaviour bias the measurement of social inequalities in self-rated health in Indonesia? An anchoring vignette analysis.

Authors:  Wulung Hanandita; Gindo Tampubolon
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Correcting bias in self-rated quality of life: an application of anchoring vignettes and ordinal regression models to better understand QoL differences across commuting modes.

Authors:  Melanie Crane; Chris Rissel; Stephen Greaves; Klaus Gebel
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-08-09       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  The relationship between perceived own health state and health assessments of anchoring vignettes.

Authors:  Andreas Hinz; Winfried Häuser; Heide Glaesmer; Elmar Brähler
Journal:  Int J Clin Health Psychol       Date:  2016-02-19

10.  Promises and Pitfalls of Anchoring Vignettes in Health Survey Research.

Authors:  Hanna Grol-Prokopczyk; Emese Verdes-Tennant; Mary McEniry; Márton Ispány
Journal:  Demography       Date:  2015-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.