A trial for comparing methods for eliciting treatment preferences from men with advanced prostate cancer: Results from the initial visit

Medical Care

Volumn 38, Issue 10, 2000, Pages 1040-1050

  Souchek, Julianne ^a,c   Stacks, James R ^a   Brody, Baruch ^a   Ashton, Carol M ^a   Giesler, R Brian ^b   Byrne, Margaret M ^a   Cook, Karon ^a   Geraci, Jane M ^a   Wray, Nelda P ^a  

^a BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c MICHAEL E DEBAKEY VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness; Decision making; Preferences; Prostate cancer; Utilities

Indexed keywords

AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMICS; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PROSTATE TUMOR; PSYCHOMETRY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; UNITED STATES;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; PSYCHOMETRICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0034294869     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200010000-00008     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, et al, for the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA 1996;275:1253-1258.
2. Nease R, Owens DK. A method for estimating the cost-effectiveness of incorporating patient preferences into practice guidelines. Med Decis Making 1994;14:382-392.
3. McNeil BJ, Weichselbaum R, Pauker SG. Speech and survival: Tradeoffs between quality and quantity of life in laryngeal cancer. N Engl J Med 1981;305:982-987.
4. O'Meara JJ, McNutt RA, Evans AT, et al. A decision analysis of streptokinase plus heparin alone for deep-vein thrombosis. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1864-1869.
5. Hornberger JC, Habraken H, Bloch DA. Minimum data needed on patient preferences for accurate, efficient medical decision making. Med Care 1995;33:297-310.
6. Nease RJ, Kneeland T, O'Connor GT, et al. Variation in patient utilities for outcomes of the management of chronic stable angina. JAMA 1995; 273:1185-1190.
7. Roest FHJ, Eijkemans MJC, Van der Donk J, et al. The use of confidence intervals for individual utilities: Limits to formal decision analysis for treatment choice. Med Decis Making 1997;17:285-291.
8. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: A review. J Health Econ 1986;5:1-30.
9. Bleichrodt H, Johannesson M. Standard gamble, time tradeoff and rating scale: Experimental results on the ranking properties of QALYs. J Health Econ 1997;16:155-175.
10. Torrance GW. Social preferences for health states: An empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socioeconomic Planning Sci 1976;10:129-136.
11. 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, eds. Values and long term care. Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books; 1982.
12. Read JL, Quinn RJ, Berwick DM, et al. Preferences for health outcomes: Comparison of assessment methods. Med Decis Making 1984;4:315-329.
13. Llewellyn-Thomas H, Sutherland HJ, Tibshirani R, et al. Describing health states: Methodological issues in obtaining values for health states. Med Care 1984;22:543-552.
14. Boyd NF, Sutherland HJ, Heasman KZ, et al. Whose utilities for decision analysis? Med Decis Making 1990;10:58-67.
15. Hornberger JC, Redelmeirer DA, Petersen J. Variability among methods to assess patients' well-being and consequent effect on a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:502-512.
16. Hershey JC, Kunreuther HC, Schoemaker PHJ. Sources of bias in assessment procedures for utility functions. Manage Sci 1982;28:936-954.
17. Kiebert GM, Stiggelbout AM, Leer JW, et al. Test-retest reliabilities of two treatment-preference instruments in measuring utilities. Med Decis Making 1993;13:133-140.
18. American Psychological Association. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1985.
19. Nord E. Methods for quality adjustment of life years. Soc Sci Med 1992;34:559-569.
20. Byrne MM, Ashton CM, Brady B, et al. Willingness to pay values for prostate cancer and related treatment effects [abstract]. In: Abstract Book, Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Association for Health Services Research; 1998 June 21-23; Washington, DC. p. 174.
21. Giesler RB, Ashton CM, Brody B, et al. Assessing the performance of utility techniques in the absence of a gold standard. Med Care 1999;37:580-588.
22. Clark JA, Wray N, Brody B, et al. Dimensions of quality of life expressed by men treated for metastatic prostate cancer. Soc Sci Med 1997;45:1299-1309.
23. Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance GW, et al. Guide to design and development of health state utility instrumentation. Hamilton, Ontario: McMaster University; 1990. Paper 90-9 in the Center for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper Series.
24. Schmidt JD, Metlin CJ, Natarajan N, et al. Trends in patterns of care for prostate cancer 1974 to 1983: Results of surveys by the American College of Surgeons. J Urol 1986;136:416-421.
25. CANCERNET-PDQ [database online]. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 1994. Updated October 31, 1994. Prostate Cancer; 5-7.
26. Hayes WL. Statistics. New York, NY: Holt Rinehart & Winston Inc; 1988.
27. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical methods. 7th ed. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press; 1980.
28. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988:376-379.
29. Weber EU. From subjective probabilities to decision weights: The effect of asymmetric loss functions on the evaluation of uncertain outcomes and events. Psychol Bull 1994;115:228-242.
30. Kahneman D, Tversky A. Choices, values, and frames. Am Psychol 1984;39:341-350.
31. O'Connor AM, Boyd NF, Warde P, et al. Eliciting preferences for alternative drug therapies in oncology: Influence of treatment outcome description, elicitation technique and treatment experience on preferences. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:811-818.
32. Von Neumann J, Morgenstern O. Theory of games and economic behavior. New York, NY: John Wiley; 1953.