Literature DB >> 7783573

Comparison of time-tradeoff utilities and rating scale values of cancer patients and their relatives: evidence for a possible plateau relationship.

J F O'Leary1, D L Fairclough, M K Jankowski, J C Weeks.   

Abstract

Because they are easy to administer, rating scales are often used as proxies for utility measures. The authors investigated the relationship between time-tradeoff utilities and rating scale values in two populations: 124 cancer patients asked to evaluate their current states of health and 102 relatives and close friends of cancer patients asked to evaluate health-state scenarios. None of the models tested effectively described the relationship between individual patients' rating scale values and time-tradeoff utilities for their current states of health. In contrast, both a plateau and a power-function model explained the variability in the responses of the relatives reasonably well (R2 = 0.56 and R2 = 0.58, respectively). Given that many respondents who were unwilling to trade off any time assigned rating scale values of well below 100, a plateau model may represent the best approach to adjusting rating scale values for health-state scenarios when it is not feasible to elicit time-tradeoff utilities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7783573     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9501500205

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  16 in total

Review 1.  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 2.  Methodological hurdles in conducting pharmacoeconomic analyses.

Authors:  J D Rizzo; N R Powe
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  QALYs: are they helpful to decision makers?

Authors:  Maurice McGregor; J Jaime Caro
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  Assessing patient preferences for treatment options and process of care in inflammatory bowel disease: a critical review of quantitative data.

Authors:  Meenakshi Bewtra; F Reed Johnson
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 5.  Using QALYs in cancer: a review of the methodological limitations.

Authors:  Martina Garau; Koonal K Shah; Anne R Mason; Qing Wang; Adrian Towse; Michael F Drummond
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  The burden of age-related macular degeneration: a value-based medicine analysis.

Authors:  Gary C Brown; Melissa M Brown; Sanjay Sharma; Joshua D Stein; Zachary Roth; Joseph Campanella; George R Beauchamp
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2005

7.  Impact of nausea/vomiting on quality of life as a visual analogue scale-derived utility score.

Authors:  S M Grunberg; N Boutin; A Ireland; S Miner; J Silveira; T Ashikaga
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  Quality-of-life assessment of fibroid treatment options and outcomes.

Authors:  Fiona M Fennessy; Chung Yin Kong; Clare M Tempany; J Shannon Swan
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  A prospective cohort study defining utilities using time trade-offs and the Euroqol-5D to assess the impact of cancer-related lymphedema.

Authors:  Andrea L Cheville; Mously Almoza; Janice N Courmier; Jeffrey R Basford
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-08-01       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Estimating the effect of changes in body mass index on health state preferences.

Authors:  Zafar Hakim; Anne Wolf; Louis P Garrison
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.