Patients as Reliable Reporters of Medical Care Process

Brown, Jonathan B.; Adams, Miriam E.

doi:10.1097/00005650-199205000-00003

Cited by 189 publications

(118 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

114

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, our study is based on self-reported data. Although the tendency of respondents to over-report health promotion and disease prevention activities is widely recognized (Brown and Adams, 1992;Johnson et al, 2005;Newell et al, 1999), there is little reason to think that over-reporting would be more prevalent among working poor adults than among working nonpoor adults, and therefore, we do not believe that this biased our results substantially. Third, the HRS does not ask for exact time intervals since preventive service use and so our measurement of use of preventive care cannot be based on the specific time intervals recommended by either the USPSTF for cholesterol and cervical, breast, and prostate screening or the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for influenza vaccination.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Use of preventive care by the working poor in the United States

Ross

Bernheim

Bradley

et al. 2007

Preventive Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective-Examine the association between poverty and preventive care use among older working adults.Method-Cross-sectional analysis of the pooled 1996, 1998 and 2000 waves of the Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative sample of older community-dwelling adults, studying self-reported use of cervical, breast, and prostate cancer screening, as well as serum cholesterol screening and influenza vaccination. Adults with incomes within 200% of the federal poverty level were defined as poor.Results-Among 10,088 older working adults, overall preventive care use ranged from 38% (influenza vaccination) to 76% (breast cancer screening). In unadjusted analyses, the working poor were significantly less likely to receive preventive care. After adjustment for insurance coverage, education, and other socio-demographic characteristics, the working poor remained significantly less likely to receive breast cancer (RR 0.92, 95% CI, 0.86-0.96), prostate cancer (RR 0.89, 95% CI, 0.81-0.97), and cholesterol screening (RR 0.91, 95% CI,) than the working non-poor, but were not significantly less likely to receive cervical cancer screening (RR 0.96, 95% CI, 0.90-1.01) or influenza vaccination (RR 0.92, 95% CI, 0.84-1.01).Conclusion-The older working poor are at modestly increased risk for not receiving preventive care.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Use of preventive care by the working poor in the United States

Ross

Bernheim

Bradley

et al. 2007

Preventive Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is some evidence, however, that patient recall accuracy is relatively high for periods of up to 3 months, with measures of agreement (kappa) between patient reports and medical charts as high as 88-96%. [9][10][11][12][13] Gold et al 5 acknowledge the advantages and disadvantages of each of these three methods of data collection and seem to advocate the approach or combination of approaches which most 'cost effectively' provides sufficient, accurate and unbiased data. Authors presenting cost analyses should clearly outline their data collection methods, discussing any limitations clearly.…”

Section: Methods Of Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic analyses of bone marrow and blood stem cell transplantation for leukemias and lymphoma: what do we know?

Waters

Bennett

Pajeau³

et al. 1998

Bone Marrow Transplant

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary:The use of blood and/or bone marrow stem cell transplantation (SCT) grew extensively in the last decade as technological advances led to improved outcomes and wider availability. The first study of SCT costs, however, was not published until 1989. This paper summarizes current knowledge about costs and cost-effectiveness of allogeneic and autologous SCT for leukemias and lymphoma. Methodological issues in cost studies such as types of costs, methods of data collection, and time horizons are discussed, and studies are evaluated with regard to these issues. Considerations specific to economic analyses of SCT are considered, including the potential impact of technological changes, learning curve effects, and inter-institutional differences. Keywords: cost-effectiveness, economics, stem cell transplantation The field of blood and bone marrow transplantation (stem cell transplantation, SCT) has changed dramatically over the past 10 years. Major advances in SCT technology has led to improved outcomes and wider availability. Numbers of SCT have increased from less than 5000 to more than 40 000 annually, and hundreds of papers related to SCT have been published.1 Yet relatively few studies have addressed the costs and cost-effectiveness of this complex technology, although perceived high costs contribute to the controversy over its use.The first comprehensive study of the costs of SCT was reported in 1989 and indicated that, while allogeneic bone marrow transplantation for patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) was very costly, it was more cost-effective than chemotherapy.2 In the past 3 years, with physicians facing increased economic pressures in the United States and abroad, many more studies have included economic analyses. These studies report markedly lower costs of SCT than in 1989 and even more favorable cost-effectiveness profiles for persons with hematological malignancies. In this paper, we provide an overview of economic analyses in general and subsequently summarize studies of costs of SCTs for leukemia and lymphoma.Because the studies we review were conducted utilizing various methodologies and make numerous, differing assumptions regarding cost and clinical parameters, we begin our paper with a proposed framework for reviewing cost analyses (Section 1). We then review some of the 'issues' that our framework highlights, based on the work of others in the field (Section 2).3-8 Section 3 begins with a table summarizing the current literature on costs of SCT using the framework developed in Section 1. Section 3 also discusses the more current, well-designed/presented studies, highlighting the authors' conclusions. Section 4 presents some additional issues to be considered in cost analyses of SCT. A framework for comparing cost studiesThere is growing attention to the costs and cost-effectiveness of medical interventions. Review of the sizable body of literature devoted to the topic reveals conflicting definitions of cost as well as discrepant methods for conducting and reporting studies. The w...

show abstract

“…While Brown et al [23] suggested that patients could recall their clinical encounters effectively up to 3 months after the event, Evans et al [24] suggest recall is in fact related to the saliency or the impact of the event on the patient's life. For example, a recall of 6 months might suffice for hospitalisations whereas a shorter time frame would be required for repeated visits to a general practitioner (GP) or community pharmacy.…”

Section: Based On Patient Recallmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conducting Economic Evaluations Alongside Randomised Trials: Current Methodological Issues and Novel Approaches

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

made substantial contributions to the design and drafting of the work, approved the version to be published, and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Dyfrig Hughes will act as the guarantor of the work presented in this paper. 2 Abstract:Trial-based economic evaluations are an important aspect of health technology assessment. The availability of patient-level data coupled with unbiased estimates of clinical outcomes means that randomised controlled trials are effective vehicles for the generation of economic data. However there are methodological challenges to trial-based evaluations, which include the collection of reliable data on resource use and cost, choice of health outcome measure, calculating minimally important differences, dealing with missing data, extrapolating outcomes and costs over time and the analysis of multinational trials. This review focuses on the state of the art of selective elements concerning the design, conduct, analysis and reporting of trial-based economic evaluations. The limitations of existing approaches are detailed and novel methods introduced. The review is internationally relevant but with a focus towards practice in the UK. Key Messages: Trial-based economic evaluations require careful consideration of design, conduct, analysis and reporting.  Areas for improvement include the need for more robust methods to estimate resource utilisation, use of multiple imputation for missing data, and application of appropriate modelling for the assessment of the impact of non-adherence.  This review identifies economic methods that may also enhance clinical trials such as for calculating minimally important differences using discrete choice experiments, and undertaking data extrapolation based on modelling.

show abstract

Patients as Reliable Reporters of Medical Care Process

Cited by 189 publications

References 30 publications

Use of preventive care by the working poor in the United States

Use of preventive care by the working poor in the United States

Economic analyses of bone marrow and blood stem cell transplantation for leukemias and lymphoma: what do we know?

Conducting Economic Evaluations Alongside Randomised Trials: Current Methodological Issues and Novel Approaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About