Assessing convergent validity of health-state utilities obtained using different scaling methods

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 487-498

  Nickerson, Carol A E ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Convergent validity; Equivalence technique; Health state preferences; Healthstate utilities; Magnitude estimation; Person tradeoff; Rating scale; Scaling; Standard gamble; Time tradeoff; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CORRELATION FUNCTION; DECISION MAKING; HEALTH STATUS; RATING SCALE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 0032853130     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9901900417     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Keeney RL, Raiffa H. Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. New York: Wiley, 1976.
2. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: a review. J Health Econ. 1986;5:1-30.
3. Froberg DG, Kane RL. Methodology for measuring health-state preferences - IV: Progress and a research agenda. J Clin Epidemiol. 1989;42:675-35.
4. Kaplan RM, Bush JW, Berry CC. Health status: types of validity and the index of well-being. Health Serv Rev. 1976;11:478-507.
5. Loomes G, McKenzie L. The use of QALYs in health care decision making. Soc Sci Med. 1989;28:299-308.
6. Patrick DL, Bush JW, Cheri MM. Methods for measuring levels of well-being for a health status index. Health Serv Res. 1973;8:228-45.
7. Wolfson AD, Sinclair AJ, Bornbardier C, McGeer A. Preference measurements for functional status in stroke patients: interrater and intertechnique comparisons. In: Kane RL, Kane RA (eds). Values and Long Term Care. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1982:191-214.
8. Froberg DG, Kane RL. Methodology for measuring health-state preferences - II: Scaling methods. J Clin Epidemiol. 1989;42:459-71.
9. Froberg DG, Kane RL. Methodology for measuring health-state preferences - I: Measurement strategies. J Clin Epidemiol. 1989;42:345-54.
10. Nord E. The validity of a visual analogue scale in determining social utility weights for health states. Int J Health Plan Manage. 1991;6:234-42.
11. Bass EB, Steinberg EP, Pitt HA, et al. Comparison of the rating scale and the standard gamble in measuring patient preferences for outcomes of gallstone disease. Med Decis Making. 1994;14:307-14.
12. Bosch JL, Hunink MGM. The relationship between descriptive and valuational quality-of-life measures in patients with intermittent claudication. Med Decis Making. 1996;16:217-25.
13. Gage BF, Cardinalli AB, Owens DK. The effect of stroke and stroke prophylaxis with aspirin or warfarin on quality of life. Arch Intern Med. 1996;156:1829-36.
14. Hornberger JC, Redelmeier DA, Petersen J. Variability among methods to assess patients' well-being and consequent effect on a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45: 505-12.
15. Krabbe PFM, Essink-Bot M-L, Bonsel GJ. On the equivalence of collectively and individually collected responses: standard-gamble and time-tradeoff judgments of health states. Med Decis Making. 1996;16:120-32.
16. Nease RF Jr, Kneeland T, O'Connor GT, et al. Variation in patient utilities for outcomes of the management of chronic stable angina: implications for clinical practice guidelines. JAMA. 1995;273:1185-90.
17. Redelmeier DA, Heller DN. Time preference in medical decision making and cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making. 1993;13:212-7.
18. Rutten-van Mölken MPMH, Custers F, Van Doorslaer EKA, et al. Comparison of performance of four instruments in evaluating the effects of salmeterol on asthma quality of life. Eur Respir J. 1995;8:888-98.
19. Tsevat J, Goldman L, Lamas GA, et al. Functional status versus utilities in survivors of myocardial infarction. Med Care. 1991;29:1153-59.
20. Tsevat J, Solzan JG, Kuntz KM, et al. Health values of patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus: relationship to mental health and physical functioning. Med Care. 1996; 34:44-57.
21. Cohen J. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychol Bull. 1968;70:213-20.
22. Fleiss JL, Cohen J. The equivalence of weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educ Psychol Meas. 1973;33:613-9.
23. McGraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods. 1996;1:30-46.
24. McGraw KO, Wong SP. Correction to McGraw and Wong (1996). Psychol Methods. 1996;1:390.
25. Nickerson CAE, McClelland GH. Assessing the equivalence of health state utilities obtained using two different scaling methods. Under review.
26. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86:420-8.
27. Kaplan RM, Bush JW, Berry CC. Health status index: category rating versus magnitude estimation for measuring levels of well-being. Med Care. 1979;17:501-21.
28. O'Brien B, Viramontes JL. Willingness to pay: a valid and reliable measure of health state preference? Med Decis Making. 1994;14:289-97.
29. O'Connor AMC, Boyd NF, Warde P, Stolbach L, Till JE. Eliciting preferences for alternative drug therapies in oncology: influence of treatment outcome description, elicitation technique, and treatment experience on preferences. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:811-8.
30. O'Leary JF, Fairclough DL, Jankowski MK, Weeks JC. Comparison of time-tradeoff utilities and rating scale values of cancer patients and their relatives: evidence for a possible plateau relationship. Med Decis Making. 195;15:132-7.
31. Read JL, Quinn RJ, Berwick DM, Fineberg HV, Weinstein MC. Preferences for health outcomes: comparison of assessment methods. Med Decis Making. 1984;4:315-29.
32. Revicki DA, Shakespeare A, Kind P. Preferences for schizophrenia-related health states: a comparison of patients, caregivers, and psychiatrists. Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 1996;11: 101-8.
33. Torrance GW. Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socio-Econ Plan Sci. 1976;10:129-36.
34. Torrance GW, Sackett DL, Thomas WH. Utility maximization model for program evaluation: a demonstration application. In: Berg RL (ed). Health Status Indexes. Chicago, IL: Hospital Research and Educational Trust, 1973:155-71.
35. Fagot RF. A generalized family of coefficients of relational agreement for numerical scales. Psychometrika. 1993;58: 357-70.
36. Churchill DN, Torrance GW, Taylor DW, et al. Measurement of quality of life in end-stage renal disease: the time tradeoff approach. Clin Invest Med. 1987;10:14-20.
37. Haig THB, Scott DA, Wickelt LI. The rational zero point for an illness index with ratio properties. Med Care. 1986;24: 113-24.
38. Stalmeier PFM, Bezembinder TGG, Unic IJ. Proportional heuristics in time tradeoff and conjoint measurement. Med Decis Making. 1996;16:36-44.
39. Stiggelbout AM, Eijkemans MJC, Kiebert GM, Kievit J, Leer J-WH, De Haes HJCJM. The "utility" of the visual analog scale in medical decision making and technology assessment: is it an alternative to the time trade-off? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1996;12:291-8.
40. Dolan P, Sutton M. Mapping visual analogue scale health state valuations onto standard gamble and time-tradeoff values. Soc Sci Med. 1997;44:1519-30.
41. Quinn RJ. The effect of measurement method on preference scales in a medical decision-making context. Doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado at Boulder, Department of Psychology, 1981. Dissertation Abstracts International. 1982; 42(08):3502-B, Order No. 8200818.
42. Anderson NH. Methods of Information Integration Theory. New York: Academic Press, 1982.
43. Fischer GW. Convergent validation of decomposed multi-attribute utility assessment procedures for risky and riskless decisions. Organ Behav Hum Perform. 1977;18:295-315.
44. Kemp S. Magnitude estimation of the utility of public goods. J Appl Psychol. 1991;76:533-40.
45. Rutten-van Mölken MPMH, Bakker CH, van Doorslaer EKA, van der Linden S. Methodological issues of patient utility assessment: experience from two clinical trials. Med Care. 1995;33:922-37.
46. Nickerson CA, McClelland GH. Across-persons versus within-persons tests of expectancy-value models: a methodological note. J Behav Decis Making. 1989;2:261-70.
47. Nickerson CAE, McClelland GH. A note on within-person versus across-persons tests of social-psychological models of the attitude-behavior relationship. Under review.
48. Bakker C, Rutten-von Mölken M, Hidding A, van Doorslaer E, Bennett K, van der Linden S. Patient utilities in ankylosing spondylitis and the association with other outcome measures. J Rheumatol. 1994;21:1298-304.
49. Bakker C, Rutten M, van Santen-Hoeufft M, et al. Patient utilities in fibromyalgia and the association with other outcome measures. J Rheumatol. 1995;22:1536-43.
50. Goldstein H. Multilevel Statistical Models. 2nd ed. New York: Halsted Press, 1995.
51. Hox JJ. Applied Multilevel Analysis. 2nd ed. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: TT-Publikaties, 1995.
52. Longford NT. Random Coefficient Models. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
53. Blischke WR, Bush JW, Kaplan RM. Successive intervals analysis of preference measures in a health status index. Health Serv Res. 1975;10:181-98.
54. Torrance GW. Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:593-600.
55. Mulley AG. Assessing patients' utilities: can the ends justify the means? Med Care. 1989;27:S269-S81.
56. James LR, Joyce WF, Slocum JW. Comment: organizations do not cognize. Academy Manage Rev. 1988;13:129-32.
57. Nickerson CAE. Does willingness to pay reflect the purchase of moral satisfaction? A reconsideration of Kahneman and Knetsch. J Environ Econ Manage. 1995;28:126-33.
58. Hammond KR, McClelland GH, Mumpower J. Human Judgment and Decision Making: Theories, Methods, and Procedures. New York: Praeger, 1980:115-27.
59. Torgerson WS. Theory and Methods of Scaling. New York: Wiley, 1958:45-8.
60. Paunonen SV, Gardner RC. Biases resulting from the use of aggregated variables in psychology. Psychol Bull. 1991;109: 520-3.
61. Wilks SS. Sample criteria for testing equality of means, equality of variances, and equality of covariances in a normal multivariate distribution. Ann Math Statist. 1946;17:257-81.
62. Votaw DF Jr. Testing compound symmetry in a normal multivariate population. Ann Math Statist. 1948;19:447-73.