Literature DB >> 8901381

Automated utility assessment of global health.

R F Nease1, R Tsai, L M Hynes, B Littenberg.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to characterize the performance of an automated utility assessment instrument for measuring preferences for overall health. The study population consisted of 83 subjects recruited from the cafeteria of a large tertiary care hospital. We assessed utilities for current health relative to perfect health and death using the rating scale, time tradeoff and standard gamble metrics. To validate the instrument, we compared utilities with the General Health subscale of the SF-36 Health Survey instrument, satisfaction with current health, and degree of bother due to current health. We evaluated interview failure rate based on irrational orderings of two practice assessments (monocular and binocular blindness) or inability to complete the interview. As expected, utility for overall health was statistically significantly associated with the General Health subscale score and measures of satisfaction with current health and degree of bother. There is substantial variation in utilities among patients with similarly severe overall health, and substantial overlap in utilities among subjects with different levels of overall health. The failure rate in the study was acceptable (9.6%). Automated assessment of utility for overall health provides a feasible means for estimating individual preferences.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8901381     DOI: 10.1007/bf00435983

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


  5 in total

1.  A Wilcoxon-type test for trend.

Authors:  J Cuzick
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1985 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  A method for estimating the cost-effectiveness of incorporating patient preferences into practice guidelines.

Authors:  R F Nease; D K Owens
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1994 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.583

3.  Variation in patient utilities for outcomes of the management of chronic stable angina. Implications for clinical practice guidelines. Ischemic Heart Disease Patient Outcomes Research Team.

Authors:  R F Nease; T Kneeland; G T O'Connor; W Sumner; C Lumpkins; L Shaw; D Pryor; H C Sox
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-04-19       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  A computer-based interview to identify HIV risk behaviors and to assess patient preferences for HIV-related health states.

Authors:  G D Sanders; D K Owens; N Padian; A B Cardinalli; A N Sullivan; R F Nease
Journal:  Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care       Date:  1994

5.  Assessing the preferences of patients with psoriasis. A quantitative, utility approach.

Authors:  K A Zug; B Littenberg; R D Baughman; T Kneeland; R F Nease; W Sumner; G T O'Connor; R Jones; E Morrison; R Cimis
Journal:  Arch Dermatol       Date:  1995-05
  5 in total
  13 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Vision and quality-of-life.

Authors:  G C Brown
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  1999

3.  Marker states and a health state prompt provide modest improvements in the reliability and validity of the standard gamble and rating scale in prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Karen E Bremner; George Tomlinson; Murray D Krahn
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-10-03       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Effect of locus of control and consideration of future consequences on time tradeoff utilities for current health.

Authors:  R M Handler; L M Hynes; R F Nease
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Measuring women's preferences for breast cancer treatments and BRCA1/BRCA2 testing.

Authors:  M Cappelli; L Surh; L Humphreys; S Verma; D Logan; A Hunter; J Allanson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Time trade-off utility modified to accommodate degenerative and life-threatening conditions.

Authors:  M W Kattan; P A Fearn; B J Miles
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  2001

7.  Health values of patients with bipolar disorder.

Authors:  J Tsevat; P E Keck; R W Hornung; S L McElroy
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Physicians' assessments of the utility of health states associated with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection.

Authors:  D K Owens; A B Cardinalli; R F Nease
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  The impact of patients' preferences on the treatment of atrial fibrillation: observational study of patient based decision analysis.

Authors:  J Protheroe; T Fahey; A A Montgomery; T J Peters
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-05-20

10.  Health state preference assessment in diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

Authors:  Sean D Sullivan; Doris P Lew; E Beth Devine; Zafar Hakim; Gayle E Reiber; David L Veenstra
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.