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

Please be advised that this information was generated on 2018-05-09 and may be subject to change.P e r g a m o n Soc. Sci. Med, Vol. 45, N o. I l , pp. 1641-1652, 1997 © 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd. A ll rights reserved P I I : S 0 2 7 7 -9 5 3 6 (9 7 )0 0 0 9 9 -3 Printed in Great Britain 0277-9536/97 $17. Abstract-The objective of the study was to consider five methods for valuing health states with respect to their comparability (convergent validity, value functions) and reliability. Valuation tasks were per formed by 104 student volunteers using five frequently used valuation methods: standard gamble (SG), time trade-off (TTO), rating scale (RS), willingness-to-pay (WTP) and the paired comparisons method (PC). Throughout the study, the EuroQoI classification system was used to construct 13 health-state descriptions. Validity was investigated using the multitrait-multimethod (M TM M ) methodology. The extent to which results of one method could be predicted by another was examined by transformations. Reliability of the methods was studied parametrically with Generalis ability Theory (an A N O V A exten sion), as well as non-parametrically. Mean values for SG were slightly higher than TTO values. The RS could be distinguished from the other methods. After a simple power transformation, the RS values were found to be close to SG and TTO. Mean values of WTP were linearly related to SG and TTO, except at the extremes of the scale. However, the reliability of WTP was low and the number of incon sistencies substantial. Valuations made by the RS proved to be the most reliable. Paired comparisons did not provide stable results. In conclusion, the results of the parametric transformation function between RS and SG/TTO provide evidence to justify the current use of RS (with transformations) not only for reasons of feasibility and reliability but also for reasons o f comparability. A definite judgement on PC requires data of a complete design. Due to the specific structure of the correlation matrix which is inherent in valuing health states, we believe that full M TM M is not applicable for the standard analysis of health-state valuations.

show abstract

“…*The reason for this exchange is that we are dealing with data that stems from a so-called stimulus-scaling task (see Froberg and Kane, 1989b).…”

Section: A N a Ly Sismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…a "gold standard". As these issues are part of an ongoing debate (Froberg and Kane, 1989b;Nord, 1992), content and cri terion-related validity were not investigated directly in this study. Here we are primarily dealing with convergent validity which may be regarded as a type of construct validity.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The comparability and reliability of five health-state valuation methods

Krabbe

Essink‐Bot

Bonsel

1997

Social Science & Medicine

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By definition, perfect health has a utility score of 1, and death has a utility score of 0. Several methods are available to estimate utilities, including the standard gamble [7,63,94,95], VASs [33,75,96], multiattribute scales (eg, SF-6D, EQ-5D [formerly known as the EuroQol], Health Utilities Index) [9,10,29,31,34,97], and the time trade-off [33,75,94,96].…”

Section: Conventional Clinical Research Versus Promsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholders in Outcome Measures: Review From a Clinical Perspective

Brinker

O’Connor

2013

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The rewards may incorporate symptom severity, side-effect burden, cost, clinician and patient preferences, etc. In general when there are multiple important outcomes, a natural approach to forming the rewards is to use preference elicitation techniques (Froberg and Kane, 1989). Since this paper focuses on the methodology for constructing adaptive treatment strategies, we utilize simple rewards (see Section 4.2 below for an example).…”

Section: Adaptive Treatment Strategies and Reinforcement Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructing evidence-based treatment strategies using methods from computer science

Pineau

Bellemare

Rush

et al. 2007

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper details a new methodology, instance-based reinforcement learning, for constructing adaptive treatment strategies from randomized trials. Adaptive treatment strategies are operationalized clinical guidelines which recommend the next best treatment for an individual based on his/her personal characteristics and response to earlier treatments. The instance-based reinforcement learning methodology comes from the computer science literature, where it was developed to optimize sequences of actions in an evolving, time varying system. When applied in the context of treatment design, this method provides the means to evaluate both the therapeutic and diagnostic effects of treatments in constructing an adaptive treatment strategy. The methodology is illustrated with data from the STAR*D trial, a multi-step randomized study of treatment alternatives for individuals with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder.

show abstract

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

Cited by 487 publications

References 26 publications

The comparability and reliability of five health-state valuation methods

The comparability and reliability of five health-state valuation methods

Stakeholders in Outcome Measures: Review From a Clinical Perspective

Constructing evidence-based treatment strategies using methods from computer science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About