Literature DB >> 2732774

Methodology for measuring health-state preferences--II: Scaling methods.

D G Froberg1, R L Kane.   

Abstract

This paper begins with a discussion of measurement principles relevant to determining health-state preferences. Six scaling methods are described and evaluated on the basis of their reliability, validity, and feasibility. They are the standard gamble, time trade-off, rating scale, magnitude estimation, equivalence, and willingness-to-pay methods. Reliability coefficients for most methods are acceptable although the low coefficients for measurements taken a year apart suggest that preferences change over time. Convergent validity among methods has been supported in some but not all studies, and there are limited data supporting hypothetical relationships between preferences and other variables. The category ratings method is easiest to administer and appears to yield valid scale values; thus, it is recommended for large-sample studies. However, decision-oriented methods, particularly the time trade-off and standard gamble, may be more effective in small-scale investigations and individual decision making.

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2732774     DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(89)90136-4

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


  119 in total

1.  Measuring outcomes in economic evaluations. This economics note is misleading.

Authors:  S Dixon; C Green
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-09-11

2.  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

3.  Feasibility, validity and test-retest reliability of scaling methods for health states: the visual analogue scale and the time trade-off.

Authors:  X Badia; S Monserrat; M Roset; M Herdman
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 4.  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 5.  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

6.  The reproducibility of ophthalmic utility values.

Authors:  G C Brown; M M Brown; S Sharma; G Beauchamp; H Hollands
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2001

Review 7.  Valuing health-related quality of life. Issues and controversies.

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

8.  Quality of life related to fear of falling and hip fracture in older women: a time trade off study.

Authors:  G Salkeld; I D Cameron; R G Cumming; S Easter; J Seymour; S E Kurrle; S Quine
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-02-05

9.  Estimation and comparison of derived preference scores from the SF-36 in lung transplant patients.

Authors:  Francis S Lobo; Cynthia R Gross; Barbara J Matthees
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Addition of adult-to-adult living donation to liver transplant programs improves survival but at an increased cost.

Authors:  Patrick G Northup; Michael M Abecassis; Michael J Englesbe; Jean C Emond; Vanessa D Lee; George J Stukenborg; Lan Tong; Carl L Berg
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 5.799

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.