Valuing health-related quality of life: Issues and controversies

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 119-127

  Dolan, Paul ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HEALTH CARE; HEALTH STATUS; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW;

DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; HEALTH PRIORITIES; HUMANS; QUALITY OF LIFE; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 0032910011     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199915020-00001     Document Type: Review

References (50)

1. 1. Jachuk SJ, Brierley H, Jachuk S, et al. The effect of hypertensive drugs on the quality of life. J R Coll Gen Pract 1982; 32 (235): 103-5
2. 2. Ng YK. Welfare economics. London: MacMillan, 1992
3. 3. Johannesson M, Jonsson B, Karlson G. Outcome measurement in economic evaluation. Health Econ 1996; 5: 279-96
4. 4. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989
5. 5. Gold M, Siegal JE, Russell LB, et al. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford (NY): Oxford University Press, 1996
6. 6. Mehrez A, Gafni A. Quality-adjusted life years: utility theory, and health-years equivalents. Med Decis Making 1989; 9: 142-9
7. 7. Pliskin JS, Shepard DS, Weinstein MC. Utility functions for life years and health status. Oper Res 1980; 28: 206-44
8. 8. Miyamoto JM, Eraker SA. Parameter estimates for a QALY utility model. Med Decis Making 1985; 5: 191-213
9. 9. Bleichrodt H, Wakker P, Johannesson M. Characterizing QALYs by risk neutrality. J Risk Uncertainty 1997; 15: 107-114
10. 10. Lipscomb J. Value preferences for health: meaning measurement and use in program evaluation. In: Kane RL, Kane RA, editors. Values and long term care. Lexington (MA): Lexington Books, 1982
11. 11. Donaldson C. Willingness to pay for publicly-provided goods: a possible measure of benefit. J Health Econ 1990; 9: 103-18
12. 12. Ryan M, Hughes J. Using conjoint analysis to assess women's preferences for miscarriage management. Health Econ 1997; 6: 261-73
13. 13. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. J Health Econ 1986; 5: 1-30
14. 14. von Neumann J, Morgenstern O. Theory of games and economic behaviour. New York: Wiley, 1953
15. 15. Torrance GW, Feeny D. Utilities and quality-adjusted life years. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1989; 5: 559-75
16. 16. Llewellyn-Thomas H, Sutherland HJ, Tibshirani R, et al. The measurement of patients' values in medicine. Med Decis Making 1982; 2: 449-62
17. 17. Schoemaker PJH. The expected utility model: its variants, purposes, evidence and limitations. J Econ Lit 1982; 20: 529-63
18. 18. Gafni A, Birch. Preferences for outcomes in economic evaluation: an economic approach to addressing economic problems. Soc Sci Med 1995; 40: 767-76
19. 19. Richardson J. Cost-utility analysis: what should be measured? Soc Sci Med 1994; 39 (1): 7-21
20. 20. Mehrez A, Gafni A. The health-years equivalents: how to measure them using the standard gamble approach. Med Decis Making 1991; 11: 140-6
21. 21. Buckingham K, Drummond M. A theoretical and empirical classification of health valuation techniques. Health Economists Study Group (HESG) Conference; 1993 Jul 3-5; Strathclyde
22. 22. Dolan P, Jones-Lee M. The time trade-off: a note on the effect of lifetime reallocation of consumption and discounting. J Health Econ 1997; 16: 731-9
23. 23. Meycrowitz BE. Postmastectomy coping strategies and quality of life. Health Psychol 1983; 2: 117-32
24. 24. Cassileth BR, Lusk EJ, Strouse TB, et al. Psychosocial status in chronic illness: a comparative analysis of six diagnostic groups. N Engl J Med 1984; 311: 506-11
25. 25. Edgar A, Salek S, Shickle D, et al. The ethical QALY: ethical issues in healthcare resource allocations. Haslemere: Euromed Communications, 1998
26. 26. Richardson J, Hall J, Salkfeld G. The measurement of utility in multiphase health states. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1996; 12: 151-62
27. 27. Kupperman M, Shiboski S, Feeny D, et al. Can preference scores for discrete states be used to derive preference scores for an entire path of events? Med Decis Making 1997; 17: 42-55
28. 28. Froberg DG, Kane RL. Methodology for measuring health state preferences II: scaling methods. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42: 459-71
29. 29. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, et al. Valuing health states: a comparison of methods. J Health Econ 1996; 15: 209-31
30. 30. Torrance GW. Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socioecon Plann Sci 1976; 10; 129-36
31. 31. Reed WW, Herbers JE, Noel GL. Cholesterol lowering therapy: what patients expect in return. J Gen Intern Med 1993; 8: 591-6
32. 32. Bleichrodt H, Johannesson M. Standard gamble, time trade-off and rating scale: experimental results on the ranking properties of QALYs. J Health Econ 1997; 16: 155-75
33. 33. Wolfson AD, Sinclair AJ, Bombardier C, et al. Preference measurements for functional status in stroke patients: interrater and intertechnique comparisons. In: Kane RL, Kane RA, editors. Values and long term care. Lexington (MA): Lexicon Books, 1982
34. 34. Read JL, Quinn RJ, Berrick DM, et al. Preferences for health outcomes: comparison of assessment methods. Med Decis Making 1984; 4 (3): 315-29
35. 35. Stiggelbout AM, Kiebert GM, Kievit J, et al. Utility assessment in cancer patients: adjustment of time trade-off scores for the utility of life years and comparison with standard gamble scores. Med Decis Making 1994; 14: 82-90
36. 36. Lenert LA, Cher DJ, Goldstein MK, et al. The effect of search procedures on utility elicitations. Med Decis Making 1998; 18: 76-83
37. 37. 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 (5): 505-12
38. 38. Loomes G. Disparities between health state measures: is there a rational explanation? In: Gerrard W, editor. The economics of rationality. London: Routledge, 1993
39. 39. van Busschbach J. The validity of QALYs [dissertation]. Rotterdam: Erasmus University, 1994
40. 40. Stiggelhout AM, Eijkemans MJC, Kiebert GM, et al. The 'utility' of the visual analog scale in medical decsion making and technology assessment: is it an alternative to the time trade-off? Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1996; 2: 291-8
41. 41. Dolan P, Sutton M. Mapping visual analogue scale scores onto time trade-off and standard gamble utilities. Soc Sci Med 1997; 44: 1519-30
42. 42. Bleichrodt H, Johannesson M. An experimental test of a theoretical foundation for rating scale valuations. Med Decis Mak 1997; 17: 208-16
43. 43. Froberg DG, Kane RL. Methodology for measuring health state preferences III: population and context effects. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42: 585-92
44. 44. Sackett DL, Torrance GW. The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public. J Chronic Dis 1978; 31: 697-704
45. 45. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, et al. The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ 1996; 5: 141-54
46. 46. Dolan P. The effect of experience of illness on health state valuations. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 551-64
47. 47. Llewellyn-Thomas H, Sutherland HJ, Tibshirani R, et al. Descibing health states: methodologic issues in obtaining values for health states. Med Care 1984; 22: 543-52
48. 48. Daly E, Gray A, Barlow D, et al. Measuring the impact of menopausal symptoms on quality of life. BMJ 1993; 307: 836-40
49. 49. Fitzpatrick R. A pragmatic defence of health status measures. Health Care Anal 1996; 4: 265-72
50. 50. Lockwood M. Quality of life and resource allocation. In: Bell M, Mendus S, editors. Philosophy and medical welfare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988