Understanding differences between self-ratings and population ratings for health in the EuroQOL

Quality of Life Research

Volumn 12, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 611-619

  Insinga, Ralph P ^a   Fryback, Dennis G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

EQ 5D; Health status; Patient preferences; Self rated health; Visual analogue scales

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT; ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; EXPERIENCE; FEMALE; GENDER; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MALE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NORMAL HUMAN; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC OPINION; QUALITY OF LIFE; RATING SCALE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SELF REPORT; SOCIAL ASPECT; SOCIAL CLASS; UNITED KINGDOM; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; EUROPE; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PUBLIC OPINION; QUALITY OF LIFE; SELF ASSESSMENT (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 0042330234     PISSN: 09629343     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1025170308141     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Gold M, Siegel J, Russell L, Weinstein M. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
2. Nord E. Cost-Value Analysis in Health Care. In: MacLean D (ed), Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and Public Policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
3. Tengs TO, Wallace A. One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Med Care 2000; 38: 583-637.
4. De Wit GA, Busschbach JJ, De Charro FT. Sensitivity and perspective in the valuation of health status: Whose values count? Health Econ 2000; 9: 109-126.
5. Jansen SJ, Stiggelbout AM, Wakker PP, Nooij MA, Noordijk EM, Kievit J. Unstable preferences: A shift in valuation or an effect of the elicitation procedure? Med Decis Making 2000; 20: 62-71.
6. Jansen SJ, Kievit J, Nooij MA, Stiggelbout AM. Stability of patients' preferences for chemotherapy: The impact of experience. Med Decis Making 2001; 21: 295-306.
7. Kind P, Dolan P. The effect of past and present illness experience on the valuations of health states. Med Care 1995; 33: AS255-AS263.
8. Dolan P. The effect of experience of illness on health state valuations. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 551-564.
9. EuroQOL - a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQOL Group [see comments]. Health Policy 1990; 16: 199-208.
10. Kind P. The EuroQOL Instrument: An Index of Health-Related Quality of Life. 2nd ed. in: Spilker B (ed), Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 1996.
11. Brazier J, Jones N, Kind P. Testing the validity of the Euroqol and comparing it with the SF-36 health survey questionnaire [see comments]. Qual Life Res 1993; 2: 169-180.
12. Bjork S, Norinder A. The weighting exercise for the Swedish version of the EuroQOL. Health Econ 1999; 8: 117-126.
13. Zethraeus N, Johannesson M. A comparison of patient and social tariff values derived from the time trade-off method. Health Econ 1999; 8: 541-545.
14. Bosch JL, Hunink MG. Comparison of the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) and the EuroQOL EQ-5D in patients treated for intermittent claudication. Qual Life Res 2000; 9: 591-601.
15. Kind P, Dolan P, Gudex C, Williams A. Variations in population health status: Results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey [see comments]. Br Med J 1998; 316: 736-741.
16. Gudex C, Dolan P, Kind P. Health state valuations from the general public using the visual analogue scale. Qual Life Res 1996; 5: 521-531.
17. Woloshin S, Schwartz L, Moncur M, Gabriel S, Tosteson A. Assessing values for health: Numeracy matters. Med Decis Making 2001; 21: 382-390.
18. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. The time trade-off method: Results from a general population study. Health Econ 1996; 5: 141-154.
19. Torrance GW, Thomas WH, Sackett DL. A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programs. Health Serv Res 1972; 7: 118-133.
20. Torrance G. Social preferences for health states: An empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. SocioEcon Plan Sci 1976; 10: 129-136.
21. Badia X, Herdman M, Dipstat M, Ohinmaa A. Feasibility and validity of the VAS and TTO for eliciting general population values for temporary health states: A comparative study. Health Serv Res Outcome Res Meth 2001; 2: 51-65.
22. Polsky D, Willke RJ, Scott K, Schulman KA, Glick HA. A comparison of scoring weights for the EuroQOL derived from patients and the general public. Health Econ 2001; 10: 27-37.
23. Essink-Bot ML, Krabbe PF, Bonsel GJ, Aaronson NK. An empirical comparison of four generic health status measures. The Nottingham Health Profile, the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short- Form Health Survey, the COOP/WONCA charts, and the EuroQOL instrument. Med Care 1997; 35: 522-537.
24. Johnson JA, Coons SJ. Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 in an adult US sample. Qual Life Res 1998; 7: 155-166.
25. Johnson JA, Pickard AS. Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 health surveys in a general population survey in Alberta, Canada. Med Care 2000; 38: 115-121.
26. Postulart D, Adang EM. Response shift and adaptation in chronically ill patients. Med Decis Making 2000; 20: 186-193.
27. Torrance G, Boyle MH, Horwood SP. Application of multi-attribute health utility theory to measure social preferences of health states. Oper Res 1982; 30: 1043-1049.
28. Torrance GW, Feeny DH, Furlong WJ. Visual analog scales: Do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states? Med Dec Making 2001; 21: 329-334.
29. Krabbe PF, Stouthard ME, Essink-Bot ML, Bonsel GJ. The effect of adding a cognitive dimension to the EuroQOL multiattribute health-status classification system. J Clin Epidemiol 1999; 52: 293-301.