Literature DB >> 26216584

How dead is dead? Qualitative findings from participants of combined traditional and lead-time time trade-off valuations.

Fatima Al Sayah1, Ana Mladenovic1, Kathryn Gaebel2, Feng Xie3, Jeffrey A Johnson4,5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The EuroQol Valuation Technology (EQ-VT) uses traditional time trade-off (tTTO) for health states better than dead and lead-time TTO (LT-TTO) for states worse than dead to elicit a value (-1.0 to +1.0) for each health state. In the Canadian EQ-5D-5L Valuation study which used the EQVT platform, we observed an unexpected peak in frequency of "0" values and few negative values, particularly in the range of 0 to -0.5. To better understand this finding, we sought to explore respondents' thought processes while valuing a health state, and their understanding of the tTTO and LT-TTO exercises.
METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with EQVT task respondents. Questions focused on valuations of health states as: (a) Same as dead in tTTO, (b) Worse than dead in tTTO but changed to same as dead in LT-TTO, (c) Worse than dead in LT-TTO, and (d) Worse than dead in LT-TTO with trading off all 10 years. Data were analyzed using content and thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Mean age of participants (N = 70) was 40 ± 18.1 years, 60% female, and 76% Caucasian. Participants provided similar reasons for valuing a health state same as or worse than dead. Many participants expressed confusion about worse than dead valuations, distinction between same as and worse than dead, and the transition from tTTO to LT-TTO. A few indicated that the addition of 10 years of full health in the LT-TTO influenced their valuations.
CONCLUSIONS: The transition from tTTO to LT-TTO in the EQVT was confusing to participants, whereby some health state valuations around this transition appeared to be arbitrary.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EQVT digital platform; Health state valuation; Interviews; Lead-time time-trade off

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26216584     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-015-1073-9

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


  20 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.  'Irrational' stated preferences: a quantitative and qualitative investigation.

Authors:  Fernando San Miguel; Mandy Ryan; Mabelle Amaya-Amaya
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 3.046

3.  Lead time TTO: leading to better health state valuations?

Authors:  Arthur E Attema; Matthijs M Versteegh; Mark Oppe; Werner B F Brouwer; Elly A Stolk
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 3.046

4.  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

5.  Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.

Authors:  Hsiu-Fang Hsieh; Sarah E Shannon
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2005-11

6.  Rationalising the 'irrational': a think aloud study of discrete choice experiment responses.

Authors:  Mandy Ryan; Verity Watson; Vikki Entwistle
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.046

7.  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

8.  A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol.

Authors:  Mark Oppe; Nancy J Devlin; Ben van Hout; Paul F M Krabbe; Frank de Charro
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 5.725

9.  Lead versus lag-time trade-off variants: does it make any difference?

Authors:  Federico Augustovski; Lucila Rey-Ares; Vilma Irazola; Mark Oppe; Nancy J Devlin
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2013-07

10.  Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L).

Authors:  M Herdman; C Gudex; A Lloyd; Mf Janssen; P Kind; D Parkin; G Bonsel; X Badia
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-04-09       Impact factor: 4.147

View more
  4 in total

1.  Health literacy and logical inconsistencies in valuations of hypothetical health states: results from the Canadian EQ-5D-5L valuation study.

Authors:  Fatima Al Sayah; Jeffrey A Johnson; Arto Ohinmaa; Feng Xie; Nick Bansback
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-01-25       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  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

3.  How different are composite and traditional TTO valuations of severe EQ-5D-5L states?

Authors:  Feng Xie; Eleanor Pullenayegum; Kathy Gaebel; Nick Bansback; Stirling Bryan; Arto Ohinmaa; Lise Poissant; Jeffrey A Johnson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-02-13       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  A threshold explanation for the lack of variation in negative composite time trade-off values.

Authors:  Bram Roudijk; Rogier Donders; Peep Stalmeier
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2022-05-27       Impact factor: 3.440

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.