Improving the sensitivity of the time trade-off method: Results of an experiment using chained TTO questions

Health Care Management Science

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 53-61

  Morrison, G C ^a   Neilson, A ^b   Malek, M ^c  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b HealthEcon Ltd   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ST ANDREWS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Disability; Health status valuation; Outcomes measurement; Time trade off

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; SELF CONCEPT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UNITED KINGDOM;

HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); SCOTLAND; SELF EFFICACY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0036484311     PISSN: 13869620     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1013253119756     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. F. de Ruyter, Evaluating outcome in assistive technology: Do we understand the commitment? Assistive Technology (1995) 3-16.
2. P. Dolan, C. Gudex, P. Kind and A. Williams, The time trade-off method: Results from a general population study, Health Economics 5(2) (1996) 141-154.
3. W.R. Dubourg, M.W. Jones-Lee and G. Loomes, Imprecise preferences and the WTP-WTA disparity, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 9 (1994) 115-133.
4. W.R. Dubourg, M.W. Jones-Lee and G. Loomes, Imprecise preferences and survey design in contingent valuation, Economica 64 (1997) 681-702.
5. D. Felce, Defining and applying the concept of quality of life, Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 41(2) (1984) 126-135.
6. J.C. Hershey and P.J.H. Schoemaker, Probability versus certainty equivalence methods in utility measurement: Are they equivalent? Management Science 31 (1985) 1213-1231.
7. J.C. Hornberger, D.A. Redelmeier and J. Petersen, Variability among Methods to Assess Patients well-being and consequent effect on a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 45(5) (1992) 505-512.
8. S.J.T. Jansen, J. Kievit, M.A. Nooij and A.M. Stiggelbout, Stability of patients' preferences for chemotherapy: The impact of experience, Medical Decision Making 21(4) (2000) 295-306.
9. S.J.T. Jansen, A.M. Stiggelbout, P.P. Wakker, T.P.M. Vliet Vlieland, J.-W.H. Leer, M.A. Nooy and J. Kievit, Patients' utilities for cancer treatments: A study of the chained procedure for the standard gamble and the time tradeoff, Medical Decision Making 18(4) (1998) 391-399.
10. M.W. Jones-Lee, G. Loomes and P.R. Philips, Valuing the prevention of non-fatal road injuries: Contingent valuation v standard gambles, Oxford Economic Papers 47(4) (1995) 676-695.
11. D. Kahneman, J.L. Knetsch and R.H. Thaler, Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem, Journal of Political Economy 98(6) (1990) 1325-1348.
12. J.L. Knetsch, The endowment effect and evidence of nonreversible indifference curves, American Economic Review 79(5) (1989) 1277-1284.
13. J.L. Knetsch and J.A. Sinden, Willingness to pay and compensation demanded: Experimental evidence of an unexpected disparity in measures of value, Quarterly Journal of Economics 99(3) (1984) 507-521.
14. P.F.M. Krabbe, M.-L. Essink-Bot and G.J. Bonsel, The comparability and reliability of five health-state valuation methods, Social Science and Medicine 45(11) (1997) 1641-1652.
15. A. Mehrez and A. Gafni, Evaluating health related quality of life: An indifference curve interpretation for the time trade-off technique, Social Science and Medicine 31(11) (1990) 1281-1283.
16. G.C. Morrison, An assessment and comparison of selected methods for eliciting quality of life valuations from the public, Ph.D. thesis, University of York, UK, 1996.
17. G.C. Morrison, Resolving differences in willingness to pay and willingness to accept: Comment, American Economic Review 87(1) (1997) 236-240.
18. G.C. Morrison, Understanding the disparity between WTP and WTA: Endowment effect, substitutability, or imprecise preferences? Economics Letters 59(2) (1998) 189-194.
19. G.C. Morrison, The endowment effect and expected utility, Scottish Journal of Political Economy 47(2) (2000) 95-109.
20. A.R. Neilson, G.I. Bardsley, D.I. Rowley, J. Hogg, M. Malek, G.C. Morrison and C.A. Kirkwood, Measuring the effects of seating on people with profound and multiple disabilities - a preliminary study, Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 38(2) (2001) 201-214.
21. A.R. Neilson, M. Malek and G.C. Morrison, Health-related quality-of-life in individuals with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities and their carers receiving surgical and orthotic interventions: some preliminary results, presented at the UK HESG, Liverpool (1997).
22. E. Nord, J.L. Pinto, J. Richardson, P. Menzel and P. Ubel, Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes, Health Economics 8(1) (1999) 25-39.
23. J.L. Read, R.J. Quinn, D.M. Berwick, H.V. Fineberg and M.L. Weinstein, Preferences for health outcomes: Comparison of assessment methods, Medical Decision Making 4(3) (1984) 315-329.
24. J. Richardson, Cost-utility analysis: What should be measured? Social Science and Medicine 39 (1994) 7-21.
25. A.M. Stiggelbout, G.M. Kiebert, J. Kievit, J.W.H. Leer, G. Stoter and J.C.J.M. de Haes, Utility assessment in cancer patients: Adjustment of time trade-off scores for the utility of life years and comparison with standard gamble scores, Medical Decision Making 14 (1994) 82-90.
26. R. Thaler, Toward a positive theory of consumer choice, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 1 (1980) 39-60.
27. G.W. Torrance, W.H. Thomas and D.L. Sackett, A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programs, Health Services Research 7 (1972) 118-133.
28. G.W. Torrance, Social preferences for health states: An empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 10 (1976) 129-136.
29. G.W. Torrance, Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: A review, Journal of Health Economics 5(1) (1986) 1-30.
30. A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A reference-dependent model, Quarterly Journal of Economics 106(4) (1991) 1039-1061.
31. L.C.G. Verhoef, The measurement of individual preferences for treatment outcomes in breast cancer, Ph.D. thesis, Nijmegen Universiteits-drukkerij, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, 1994.