Literature DB >> 24435696

Development of a preference-based index from the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25.

Anne M Rentz1, Jonathan W Kowalski2, John G Walt2, Ron D Hays3, John E Brazier4, Ren Yu1, Paul Lee5, Neil Bressler6, Dennis A Revicki1.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Understanding how individuals value health states is central to patient-centered care and to health policy decision making. Generic preference-based measures of health may not effectively capture the impact of ocular diseases. Recently, 6 items from the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 were used to develop the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index health state classification, which defines visual function health states.
OBJECTIVE: To describe elicitation of preferences for health states generated from the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index health state classification and development of an algorithm to estimate health preference scores for any health state. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Nonintervention, cross-sectional study of the general community in 4 countries (Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, and United States). A total of 607 adult participants were recruited from local newspaper advertisements. In the United Kingdom, an existing database of participants from previous studies was used for recruitment.
INTERVENTIONS: Eight of 15,625 possible health states from the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index were valued using time trade-off technique. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: A θ severity score was calculated for Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index-defined health states using item response theory analysis. Regression models were then used to develop an algorithm to assign health state preference values for all potential health states defined by the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index.
RESULTS: Health state preference values for the 8 states ranged from a mean (SD) of 0.343 (0.395) to 0.956 (0.124). As expected, preference values declined with worsening visual function. Results indicate that the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index describes states that participants view as spanning most of the continuum from full health to dead. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index health state classification produces health preference scores that can be estimated in vision-related studies that include the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25. These preference scores may be of value for estimating utilities in economic and health policy analyses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24435696      PMCID: PMC4357476          DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2013.7639

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol        ISSN: 2168-6165            Impact factor:   7.389


  31 in total

1.  The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36.

Authors:  John Brazier; Jennifer Roberts; Mark Deverill
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 3.883

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

3.  Deriving a preference-based measure for cancer using the EORTC QLQ-C30.

Authors:  Donna Rowen; John Brazier; Tracey Young; Sabine Gaugris; Benjamin M Craig; Madeleine T King; Galina Velikova
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.725

4.  Agreement about identifying patients who change over time: cautionary results in cataract and heart failure patients.

Authors:  David Feeny; Karen Spritzer; Ron D Hays; Honghu Liu; Theodore G Ganiats; Robert M Kaplan; Mari Palta; Dennis G Fryback
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Rhinitis Symptom Utility Index (RSUI) in Chinese subjects: a multiattribute patient-preference approach.

Authors:  Phoebe S Y Lo; Michael C F Tong; Dennis A Revicki; Ching Chyi Lee; John K S Woo; Henry C K Lam; C Andrew van Hasselt
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 6.  Preference-based quality of life measures in people with visual impairment.

Authors:  Steven M Kymes; Bryan S Lee
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 1.973

7.  Health literacy and adherence to glaucoma therapy.

Authors:  Kelly W Muir; Cecile Santiago-Turla; Sandra S Stinnett; Leon W Herndon; R Rand Allingham; Pratap Challa; Paul P Lee
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 5.258

8.  Health- and vision-related quality of life among patients with choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration at enrollment in randomized trials of submacular surgery: SST report no. 4.

Authors:  Li Ming Dong; Ashley L Childs; Carol M Mangione; Eric B Bass; Neil M Bressler; Barbara S Hawkins; Marta J Marsh; Päivi Miskala; Harrris A Jaffee; Lee A McCaffrey
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 5.258

9.  Estimating a preference-based single index from the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire.

Authors:  Yaling Yang; John Brazier; Aki Tsuchiya; Karin Coyne
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2008-07-18       Impact factor: 5.725

10.  Using the health assessment questionnaire to estimate preference-based single indices in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Nick Bansback; Carlo Marra; Aki Tsuchiya; Aslam Anis; Daphne Guh; Tony Hammond; John Brazier
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2007-08-15
View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  The Role of Condition-Specific Preference-Based Measures in Health Technology Assessment.

Authors:  Donna Rowen; John Brazier; Roberta Ara; Ismail Azzabi Zouraq
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Challenges of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Novel Therapeutics for Inherited Retinal Diseases.

Authors:  K Thiran Jayasundera; Rebhi O Abuzaitoun; Gabrielle D Lacy; Maria Fernanda Abalem; Gregory M Saltzman; Thomas A Ciulla; Mark W Johnson
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-08-22       Impact factor: 5.258

3.  Intravitreal ranibizumab versus aflibercept versus bevacizumab for macular oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion: the LEAVO non-inferiority three-arm RCT.

Authors:  Philip Hykin; A Toby Prevost; Sobha Sivaprasad; Joana C Vasconcelos; Caroline Murphy; Joanna Kelly; Jayashree Ramu; Abualbishr Alshreef; Laura Flight; Rebekah Pennington; Barry Hounsome; Ellen Lever; Andrew Metry; Edith Poku; Yit Yang; Simon P Harding; Andrew Lotery; Usha Chakravarthy; John Brazier
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 4.014

Review 4.  Dimensions Used in Instruments for QALY Calculation: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Moustapha Touré; Christian R C Kouakou; Thomas G Poder
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Utility Index and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Glaucomatous Patients Comparing with Normal Participants.

Authors:  Kulawan Rojananuangnit; Nuttawan Sudjinda
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-02-25

6.  Longitudinal Vision-Related Quality of Life for Patients with Noninfectious Uveitis Treated with Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant or Systemic Corticosteroid Therapy.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Sugar; Vidya Venugopal; Jennifer E Thorne; Kevin D Frick; Gary N Holland; Robert C Wang; Robert Almanzor; Douglas A Jabs; Janet T Holbrook
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2017-06-16       Impact factor: 14.277

7.  Refractive and Quality of Vision Outcomes with Toric IOL Implantation in Low Astigmatism.

Authors:  Eduardo Scaldini Buscacio; Lia Florim Patrão; Haroldo Vieira de Moraes
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-12-14       Impact factor: 1.909

8.  Outcomes important to patients with non-infectious posterior segment-involving uveitis: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Mohammad O Tallouzi; David J Moore; Nicholas Bucknall; Philip I Murray; Melanie J Calvert; Alastair K Denniston; Jonathan M Mathers
Journal:  BMJ Open Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-07-21

9.  Development of one general and six country-specific algorithms to assess societal health utilities based on ASAS HI.

Authors:  Ivette Essers; Mickael Hiligsmann; Uta Kiltz; Nick Bansback; Juergen Braun; Desirée van der Heijde; Annelies Boonen
Journal:  RMD Open       Date:  2019-05-21

10.  Objective Assessment of Activity Limitation in Glaucoma with Smartphone Virtual Reality Goggles: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Rachel L Z Goh; Yu Xiang George Kong; Colm McAlinden; John Liu; Jonathan G Crowston; Simon E Skalicky
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 3.283

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.