Chained time trade-off and standard gamble methods: Applications in oesophageal cancer

European Journal of Health Economics

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 81-86

  McNamee, Paul ^a   Glendinning, Sharon ^a   Shenfine, Jonathan ^b   Steen, Nick ^a   Griffin, S Michael ^b   Bond, John ^a  

^a NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL VICTORIA INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Chaining; Health state valuation; Oesophageal cancer; Standard gamble; Time trade off

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RISK; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; ESOPHAGUS CANCER; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

AGED; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; ESOPHAGEAL NEOPLASMS; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PROBABILITY; QUALITY OF LIFE; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 1542344445     PISSN: 16187598     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10198-003-0217-y     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Botterweck AAM, Schouten JL, Volovics A, Dorant E, van den Brandt PA (2000) Trends in incidence of adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and gastric cardia in ten European countries. Int J Epidemiol 29:645-54
2. Torrance GW (1986) Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: a review. J Health Econ 5:1-30
3. Llewellym-Thomas H, Sutherland HJ, Tibshirani R, Ciampi A, Till JE, Boyd NF (1982) The measurement of patients' values. Med Decis Making 2:449-62
4. Rutten-van Mölken MP, Bakker CH, van Doorslaer EK, van der Linden S (1995) Methodological issues of patient utility measurement: experience from two clinical trials. Med Care 33:922-937
5. Hayman JA, Fairclough DL, Harris JR, Weeks JC (1997) Patient preferences concerning the trade-off between the risks and benefits of routine radiation therapy after conservative surgery for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 15:1252-1260
6. Jansen SJT, Stiggelbout M, Wakker PP, Vliet Vlieland TPM, Leer JWH, Nooy MA, Kievet J (1998) Patients utilities for cancer treatments: a study of the chained procedure for the standard gamble and time tradeoff. Med Decis Making 18:391-399
7. Morrison GC, Neilson A, Malek M (1998) Improving the sensitivity of the time trade off method: results of an experiment using chained TTO questions. Department of economics Discussion Paper No. 98/22, University of Nottingham, Nottingham
8. de Haes JCJM, Stiggelbout AM (1996) Assessment values, utilities and preferences in cancer patients. Cancer Treat Rev 22:13-26
9. Stiggelbout AM, Kiebert GM, Kievit J, Leer JWH, Habbema JDF, de Haes JCJM (1995) The "utility" of the time trade-off method in cancer patients: feasibility and proportional trade-off. J Clin Epidemiol 48:1207-1214
10. Van der Donk J, Levendag PC, Kuijpers AJ, Roest FHJ, Habbema JDF, Meeuwis CA, Schmitz PIM (1995) Patient participation in clinical decision-making for treatment of T3 laryngeal cancer: a comparison of state and process utilities. J Clin Oncol 13:2369-2378
11. Gerber ER, Wellens TR (1997) Perspectives on pretesting: "cognition" in the cognitive interview. BMS Bull Methodol Sociol 55:18-39
12. Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance GW, Barr P, Horsman J (1990) Guide to design and development of health-state utility instruments. Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper No. 90-9, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario
13. Torrance GW (1987) Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life. J Chron Dis 40:593-600
14. Gudex C (1994) Standard gamble user manual: Props and self-completion method. Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York
15. Gudex C (1994) Time trade-off user manual: props and self-completion method. Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York
16. Kind P (1996) The EuroQol instrument: an index of health-related quality of life. In: Spilker B (ed) Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia
17. Dresner SM, Griffin SM (2000) Pattern of recurrence following radical oesophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy. Br J Surg 87:1426-1433
18. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A (1996) The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ 5:141-154
19. Stalmeier PFM (2002) Discrepancies between chained and classic utilities induced by anchoring with occasional adjustments. Med Decis Making 22:53-64
20. Chapman GB, Elstein AS, Kuzel TM, Sharifi R, Nadler RB, Andrews A, Bennett CL (1998) Prostate cancer patients' utilities for health states: how it looks depends where you stand. Med Decis Making 18:278-286
21. Boyd NF, Sutherland HJ, Heasman KZ, Tritchler DL, Dummings BJ (1990) Whose utilities for decision analysis? Med Decis Making 10:58-67
22. Sackett DL, Torrance GW (1978) The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public. J Chron Dis 31:697-704
23. Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Sutherland HJ, Thiel EC (1993) Do patients' evaluations of a future health state change when they actually enter that state? Med Care 31:1002-1012
24. Jansen SJT, Kievet J, Nooij MA, Stiggelbout AM (2001) Stability of patients' preferences for chemotherapy: the impact of experience. Med Decis Making 21:295-306
25. Cook J, Richardson J, Street A (1994) Cost utility analysis of treatment options for gallstone disease: methodological issues and results. Health Econ 3:157-168
26. Dolan P (1996) Modelling valuations for health states: the effect of duration. Health Policy 38:189-203