Literature DB >> 2661731

Methodology for measuring health-state preferences--III: Population and context effects.

D G Froberg1, R L Kane.   

Abstract

In addition to the scaling method, there are many other aspects of the measurement process that may affect rater judgments of the relative desirability of health states. Although we find little compelling evidence of population differences in preferences due to demographic characteristics, there is some evidence suggesting that medical knowledge and/or experience with illness may influence raters' valuations of health states. Other aspects of the rating process that affect rater judgments can be classified as one of two types: inconsistencies due to limitations in human judgment, and inconsistencies due to situation-specific variables. When inconsistencies are due to limitations in human judgment, such as framing effects, a reasonable solution is to help the rater to see and correct the inconsistency. When inconsistencies are due to situation-specific variables, such as the way the health state is defined and presented, investigators should attempt to standardize conditions across studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2661731     DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(89)90155-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  43 in total

1.  Reliability, validity and responsiveness of two multiattribute utility measures in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Authors:  K Stavem
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  Benefit valuation in economic evaluation of cancer therapies. A systematic review of the published literature.

Authors:  J Brown; M Sculpher
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Valuing health-related quality of life. A review of health state valuation techniques.

Authors:  C Green; J Brazier; M Deverill
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  Measuring patients' preferences for treatment and perceptions of risk.

Authors:  A Bowling; S Ebrahim
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-09

Review 5.  Valuing health-related quality of life. Issues and controversies.

Authors:  P Dolan
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Factors affecting health related quality of life of patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

Authors:  Francesc Casellas; Josefa López-Vivancos; Alfonso Casado; Juan-Ramon Malagelada
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Principles of pharmacoeconomic analysis of drug therapy.

Authors:  D A Freund; R S Dittus
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Time preference for health gains versus health losses.

Authors:  L D MacKeigan; L N Larson; J R Draugalis; J L Bootman; L R Burns
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Eliciting EuroQol descriptive data and utility scale values from inpatients. A feasibility study.

Authors:  C Selai; R Rosser
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Whose quality of life? A commentary exploring discrepancies between health state evaluations of patients and the general public.

Authors:  Peter A Ubel; George Loewenstein; Christopher Jepson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.147

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.