Literature DB >> 9679992

Prostate cancer patients' utilities for health states: how it looks depends on where you stand.

G B Chapman1, A S Elstein, T M Kuzel, R Sharifi, R B Nadler, A Andrews, C L Bennett.   

Abstract

Two versions of the time-tradeoff (TTO) method were compared. In the personal TTO version, 31 prostate cancer patients decided whether they personally would give up some longevity to have perfect health rather than a longer life in a state of poor health associated with prostate cancer. In the impersonal version, 28 patients compared two hypothetical friends, one of whom has perfect health but will live less time than the other who is in poor health, and decided which person they would rather be. All patients evaluated three hypothetical health states. The two TTO methods were assessed by examining 1) how well they distinguished three health states of varying degrees of dysfunction and 2) patients' willingness to trade time for quality of life. Patients using the impersonal TTO version were more likely than those using the personal version to order the three health states appropriately (68% vs 16%, p < 0.0001) and were more willing to trade off length of life for quality of life (p < 0.05).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9679992     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9801800304

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


  17 in total

1.  Chained time trade-off and standard gamble methods. Applications in oesophageal cancer.

Authors:  Paul McNamee; Sharon Glendinning; Jonathan Shenfine; Nick Steen; S Michael Griffin; John Bond
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2004-02

2.  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

3.  Guidelines for secondary analysis in search of response shift.

Authors:  Carolyn E Schwartz; Sara Ahmed; Richard Sawatzky; Tolulope Sajobi; Nancy Mayo; Joel Finkelstein; Lisa Lix; Mathilde G E Verdam; Frans J Oort; Mirjam A G Sprangers
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Method variation in the impact of missing data on response shift detection.

Authors:  Carolyn E Schwartz; Tolulope T Sajobi; Mathilde G E Verdam; Veronique Sebille; Lisa M Lix; Alice Guilleux; Mirjam A G Sprangers
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-07-10       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 5.  A review of quality-of-life evaluations in prostate cancer.

Authors:  S D Sommers; S D Ramsey
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Value of the time trade off method for measuring utilities in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  G J Tijhuis; S J Jansen; A M Stiggelbout; A H Zwinderman; J M Hazes; T P Vliet Vlieland
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 19.103

7.  Measuring utilities by the time trade-off method in Tunisian rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Authors:  Ismail Bejia; Kamel Ben Salem; Mongi Touzi; Naceur Bergaoui
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2005-05-18       Impact factor: 2.980

8.  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

Review 9.  Prostate cancer and health-related quality of life: a review of the literature.

Authors:  David T Eton; Stephen J Lepore
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2002 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.894

10.  Agreement between prostate cancer patients and their clinicians about utilities and attribute importance.

Authors:  Arthur S Elstein; Gretchen B Chapman; Joan S Chmiel; Sara J Knight; Cheeling Chan; Robert B Nadler; Timothy M Kuzel; Amy K Siston; Charles L Bennett
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.