Self-reports of health-care utilization: Diary or questionnaire?

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 298-304

  Van Den Brink, Mandy ^a   Van Den Hout, Wilbert B ^a   Stiggelbout, Anne M ^a   Putter, Hein ^a   Van De Velde, Cornells J H ^a   Kievit, Job ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Clinical trial; Cost measurement; Economic evaluation; Methodology; Rectal cancer; Self report

Indexed keywords

COSTS; DIAGNOSIS; PATIENT MONITORING; SURGERY; SURVEYS;

COST QUESTIONNAIRE; ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS; HEALTH-CARE UTILIZATION; HOSPITALIZATION;

HEALTH CARE;

ADULT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SURGERY; CLINICAL TRIAL; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MULTICENTER STUDY; QUESTIONNAIRE; RECTUM CANCER; REVIEW; SELF REPORT;

EID: 23244435549     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462305050397     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Barber JA, Thompson SG. Analysis and interpretation of cost data in randomized controlled trials: Review of published studies. BMJ. 1998;317:1195-1200.
2. Biemer PP, Groves RM, Lyberg LE, et al. Measurement errors in surveys. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1991.
3. van den Brink M, van den Hout WB, Stiggelbout AM, et al. Cost-utility analysis of pre-operative radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer undergoing total mesorectal excision. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:244-253.
4. van Campen C, Sixma H, Kerssens JJ, et al. Comparisons of the costs and quality of patient data collection by mail versus telephone versus in-person interviews. Eur J Public Health. 1998;8:66-70.
5. Carsjo K, Thorslund M, Warneryd B. The validity of survey data on utilization of health and social services among the very old. J Gerontol. 1994;49:S156-S164.
6. Cleary PD, Jette AM. The validity of self-reported physician utilization measures. Med Care. 1984;22:796-803.
7. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.
8. Coughlin SS. Recall bias in epidemiologic studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43:87-91.
9. Goossens ME, Rutten-van Molken MP, Vlaeyen JW, et al. The cost diary: A method to measure direct and indirect costs in cost- effectiveness research. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:688-695.
10. Green S, Kaufert J, Corkhill R, et al. The collection of service utilisation data: A research note on validity. Soc Sci Med. 1979;13A:231-234.
11. Hebert R, Bravo G, Korner-Bitensky N, et al. Refusal and information bias associated with postal questionnaires and face-to-face interviews in very elderly subjects. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:373-381.
12. van den Hout WB, van den Brink M, Stiggelbout AM, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer treatments. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38:953-963.
13. Kapiteijn E, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID, et al. Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer. N Engl Med. 2001;345:638-646.
14. Lippman A, Mackenzie SG. What is "recall bias" and does it exist? Prog Clin Biol Res. 1985;163C:205-209.
15. Oostenbrink JB, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FFH. Manual for cost analyzes, methods and standard prices for economic evaluations in health care (In Dutch). Amstelveen: Dutch Health Insurance Executive Board; 2000.
16. Perkins JJ, Sanson-Fisher RW. An examination of self- and telephone-administered modes of administration for the Australian SF-36. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51:969-973.
17. Ross MM, Rideout EM, Carson MM. The use of the diary as a data collection technique. West J Nurs Res. 1994;16:414-425.
18. Stone AA, Shiffman S, Schwartz JE. Patient non-compliance with paper diaries. BMJ. 2002;324:1193-1194.
19. Stone PW, Chapman RH, Sandberg EA, et al. Measuring costs in cost-utility analyzes. Variations in the literature. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2000;16:111-124.
20. Wallihan DB, Stump TE, Callahan CM. Accuracy of self-reported health services use and patterns of care among urban older adults. Med Care. 1999;37:662-670.
21. Weinberger M, Nagle B, Hanlon JT, et al. Assessing health-related quality of life in elderly outpatients: Telephone versus face-to-face administration. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1994;42:1295-1299.
22. van Wijck EE, Bosch JL, Hunink MGM. Time-tradeoff values and standard-gamble utilities assessed during telephone interviews versus face-to-face interviews. Med Decis Making. 1998;18:400-405.
23. Wilson K, Roe B, Wright L. Telephone or face-to-face interviews?: A decision made on the basis of a pilot study. Int J Nurs Stud. 1998;35:314-321.
24. Wu AW, Jacobson DL, Berzon RA, et al. The effect of mode of administration on medical outcomes study health ratings and EuroQol scores in AIDS. Qual Life Res. 1997;6:3-10.