The 'utility' of the visual analog scale in medical decision making and technology assessment: Is it an alternative to the time trade-off?

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 291-298

  Stiggelbout, Anne M ^a   Eijkemans, Marinus J C ^b   Kiebert, Gwendoline M ^a   Kievit, Job ^a   Leer, Jan Willem H ^a   De Haes, Hanneke J C J M ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; COLORECTAL CANCER; DATA ANALYSIS; FITNESS; HUMAN; QUALITY OF LIFE; RATING SCALE; SELF EVALUATION; TESTIS CANCER; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0029882768     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462300009648     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Bombardier, C., Wolfson, A. D., Sinclair, A. J., & McGeer, A. Comparison of three preference measurement methodologies in the evaluation of a functional status index. In R. Deber & G. Thompson (eds.), Choices in health care: Decision making and evaluation of effectiveness. Toronto: University of Toronto, 1982, 145-59.
2. De Haes, J. C. J. M., De Koning, H. J., Van Oortmarssen, G. J., et al. The impact of a breast cancer screening programme on quality-adjusted life-years. International Journal of Cancer, 1991, 49, 538-44.
3. Drummond, M. F. Resource allocation decisions in health care: A role for quality of life assessments? Journal of Chronic Disease, 1987, 40, 605-16.
4. Froberg, D. A., & Kane, R. L. Methodology for measuring health-state preferences, II: Scaling methods. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1989, 42, 459-71.
5. Kaplan, R. M., Feeny, D., & Revicki, D. A. Methods for assessing relative importance in preference based outcome measures. Quality of Life Research, 1993, 2, 467-75.
6. Loomes, G. Disparities between health state measures: An explanation and some implications. York, UK: Department of Economics, University of York, 1988.
7. Netherlands Central Bureau for Statistics. Vademecum of health statistics in the Netherlands 1992. The Hague, The Netherlands, SDU Uitgeverij, 1992.
8. Nord, E. A comment on the meaning of numerical valuations of health states. Social Science Medicine, 1990, 30, 943-44.
9. Nord, E. Methods for quality adjustment of life years. Social Science Medicine, 1992, 34, 559-69.
10. O'Leary, J. F., Fairclough, D. L., Jankowsky, M. K., & Weeks, J. C. Comparison of time-tradeoff utilities and rating scale values of cancer patients and their relatives: Evidence for a possible plateau relationship. Medical Decision Making, 1995, 15, 132-37.
11. Read, J. L., Quinn, R. J., Berwick, D. M., et al. Preferences for health outcomes: Comparison of assessment methods. Medical Decision Making, 1984, 4, 315-29.
12. Stiggelbout, A. M., Kiebert, G. M., Kievit, J., et al. The "utility" of the Time Trade-Off method in cancer patients: Feasibility and proportional trade-off. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1995, 48, 1207-14.
13. Stiggelbout, A. M., Kiebert, G. M., Kievit, J., et al. Utility assessment in cancer patients: Adjustment of time tradeoff scores for the utility of life years and comparison with standard gamble scores. Medical Decision Making, 1994, 14, 82-90.
14. Torrance, G. W. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: A review. Journal of Health Economics, 1986, 5, 1-31.
15. Torrance, G. W. Social preferences for health states: An empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socio Economic Planning Science, 1976, 10, 129-36.
16. Van Busschbach, J. De validiteit van QALY's (The validity of QALY's). Unpublished PhD thesis. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Erasmus University Rotterdam, Sanders Instituut, 1994.
17. Van Hout, B., Bonsel, G., Habbema, J. D. F., et al. Heart transplantation in the Netherlands: Cost effects and scenarios. Journal of Health Economics, 1993, 12, 73-93.