Relative risk of a shuffled deck: A generalizable logical consistency criterion for sample selection in health state valuation studies

Health Economics

Volumn 15, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 835-848

  Craig, Benjamin M ^a   Ramachandran, Sulabha ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

EQ 5D; Health state valuation; Logical consistency; Time trade off; Visual analogue scale

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; RISK FACTOR; SAMPLING; SATISFACTION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; UNITED KINGDOM; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

CONSUMER SATISFACTION; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PAIN MEASUREMENT; RESEARCH; RISK; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33746869596     PISSN: 10579230     EISSN: 10991050     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hec.1108     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Devlin N et al. Logical inconsistencies in survey respondents' health state valuations - a methodological challenge for estimating social tariffs. Health Econ 2003; 12: 529-544.
2. Erickson P, Wilson R, Shannon I. Years of Healthy Life, in Health People 2000 Statistical Notes. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Centers for Health Statistics: Atlanta, GA, 1995; 1-16.
3. Kind P. The EuroQol instrument: an index of health-related quality of life. In Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials, Spilker B (ed.) (2nd edn). Lippincott-Raven: Philadelphia, 1996; 191-201.
4. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002; 21(2): 271-292.
5. Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW et al. Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Med Care 2002; 40(2): 113-128.
6. Richardson J, Day N, Peacock S, Iezzi A. Measurement of the quality of life for economic evaluation and the assessment of quality of life (AQoL) mark 2 instrument. Aust Econ Rev 2004; 37(1): 62-88.
7. Badia X, Roset M, Herdman M. Inconsistent responses in three preference-elicitation methods for health states. Soc Sci Med 1999; 49: 943-950.
8. Miller L, Mody R, Singer M. Understanding the characteristics of non traders in TTO utility elicitation. ISPOR 9th Annual International Meeting, Arlington, VA, 2004.
9. Robinson A, Dolan P, Williams A. Valuing health status using VAS and TTO: what lies behind the numbers? Soc Sci Med 1997; 45: 1289-1297.
10. Friedman D, Shyam S. Experimental Methods: A Primer for Economists. Cambridge University Press: New York, 1994.
11. Camerer C. Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, 2003.
12. Davis DD, Holt CA. Experimental Economics. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, 1993.
13. Craig BM, Kind P. Logical consistency and the valuation of health: an analysis of US survey data. Value Health 2001; 4: 50-51.
14. Groot W. Adaptation and scale of reference bias in self-assessments of quality of life. J Health Econ 2000; 19: 403-420.
15. Polsky D et al. A comparison of scoring weights for the EuroQol derived from patients and the general public. Health Econ 2001; 10: 27-37.
16. Coons SJ, Johnson JA. R01 HS10243-01A1: US Valuation of EuroQol EQ-5D Health States. AHRQ: Rockville, MD, 2001.
17. Dolan P et al. Valuing health states: a comparison of methods. J Health Econ 1996; 15: 209-231.
18. Erens B. Health-related Quality of Life: General Population Survey. Social & Community Planning Research: London, 1994.
19. Gudex C. Time trade-off user manual: props and self-completion method. Occasional Paper Series, Centre for Health Economics, University of York: York, 1994.
20. Hays RD, Woolley JM. The concept of clinically meaningful difference in health-related quality-of-life research. How meaningful is it? PharmacoEconomics 2000; 18: 419-423.
21. Norman GR, Wyrwich KW, Sloan JA. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care 2003; 41: 582-592.
22. Sloan J et al. Practical guidelines for assessing the clinical significance of health-related quality of life changes within clinical trials. Drug Inf J 2003; 37: 23-31.
23. Dolan P, Kind P. Inconsistency and health state valuations. Soc Sci Med 1996; 42: 609-615.
24. Sommerfeld J et al. Determinants of variance in health state valuations. Summary Measures of Population Health: Concepts, Ethics, Measurement and Applications. World Health Organization: Geneva, 2002; 547-569.
25. Hofstede G. A case for comparing apples with oranges. Int J Comp Sociol 1998; 39: 16-31.
26. Kenkel DS. Health behavior, health knowledge, and schooling. J Polit Econ 1991; 99: 287-305.