Measuring health preferences for health utilities index mark 3 health states: A study of feasibility and preference differences among ethnic groups in Singapore

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 61-70

  Luo, Nan ^a   Wang, Qinan ^b   Feeny, David ^c,d,e   Chen, Geraldine ^b   Li, Shu Chuen ^f   Thumboo, Julian ^g,h  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

^b NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^d CENTER FOR HEALTH RESEARCH   (United States)

^e Health Utilities Incorporated   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

^g SINGAPORE GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Singapore)

^h Dept Medicine Endocrinol Diabet   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Ethnicity; Health preference measurement; HUI3; Singapore; Utility

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ETHNICITY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERVIEW; MALE; MEASUREMENT; NORMAL HUMAN; RANDOM SAMPLE; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM; SINGAPORE;

ETHNIC GROUPS; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; SINGAPORE;

EID: 33846079284     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X06297103     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Torrance GW, Furlong WJ, Feeny DH. Health Utility Estimation. Exp Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2002 ; 2: 99-108.
2. Gold MR, Patrick DL, Torrance DG, et al. Identifying and valuing outcomes. In: Gold MR, et al., eds. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press ; 1996. p 82-134.
3. Drummond MF, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Cost-utility analysis. In: Drummond MF, et al. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 2nd ed. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press ; 1997. p 139-199.
4. Furlong WJ, Feeny DH, Torrance GW, Barr R, Horsman J. Guide to Design and Development of Health-State Utility Instrumentation. McMaster University Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper No 90-9; 1990.
5. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care. 1997 ; 35: 1095-1108.
6. Feeny DH, Furlong WJ, Torrance GW, et al. Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 system. Med Care. 2002 ; 40: 113-128.
7. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ. 2002 ; 21: 271-292.
8. Stiggelbout AM, Kiebert GM, Kievit J, et al. Utility assessment in cancer patients: adjustment of time tradeoff scores for the utility of life years and comparison with standard gamble scores. Med Decis Making. 1994 ; 14: 82-90.
9. Selai C, Rosser R. Eliciting EuroQol descriptive data and utility scale values from inpatients. A feasibility study. Pharmacoeconomics. 1995 ; 8: 147-158.
10. Loomes G, McKenzie L. The use of QALYs in health care decision making. Soc Sci Med. 1989 ; 28: 299-308.
11. Cirns J, Shackley P, Hundley V. Decision making with respect to diagnostic testing: a method of valuing the benefits of antenatal screening. Med Decis Making. 1996 ; 16: 161-168.
12. Tsuchiya A, Ikeda S, Ikegami N, et al. Estimating an EQ-5D population value Set: the case of Japan. Health Econ. 2002 ; 11: 341-353.
13. Johnson JA, Ohinmaa A, Murti B, et al. Comparison of Finnish and U.S.-based visual analog scale valuations of the EQ-5D measure. Med Decis Making. 2000 ; 20: 281-289.
14. Badia X, Roset M, Herdman M, et al. A comparison of United Kingdom and Spanish general population time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states. Med Decis Making. 2001 ; 21: 7-16.
15. Johnson JA, Luo N, Shaw JW, Kind P, Coons SJ. Valuations of EQ-5D Health States: are the United States and United Kingdom different? Med Care. 2005 ; 43: 221-228.
16. Lenert LA, Sturly A, Rapaport M, et al. Ethnic differences in values for health outcomes in schizophrenia. Qual Life Res. 2001 ; 10: 213-213.
17. Shaw JW, Johnson JA, Levin JR, Coons SJ. Racial/ethnic differences in preferences for the EQ-5D health states: results from the US population valuation study. Qual Life Res. 2004 ; 13: 1509-1509.
18. Patrick DL, Sittampalam Y, Somerville SM, Carter WB, Bergner M. A cross-cultural comparison of health status values. Am J Public Health. 1985: 75 ; 1402-1407.
19. Froberg DG, Kane RL. Methodology for measuring health-state preferences-III: population and context effects. J Clin Epidemiol. 1989: 42: 585-592.
20. Essink-Bot ML, Stouthard ME, Bonsel GJ. Generalizability of valuation on health states collected with the EuroQol questionnaire. Health Econ. 1993 ; 2: 237-246.
21. Furlong WJ. Variability of utility scores for health states among general population groups. MSc thesis, McMaster University; 1996.
22. Gold MR, Patrick DL, Torrance GW, et al. Identifying and valuing outcomes. In: Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC, eds. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press ; 1996. p 82-134.
23. Hadorn DC, Uebersax J. Large-scale outcome evaluation: how should quality of life be measured? I. Calibration of a brief questionnaire and a search for preference subgroups. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 ; 46: 607-618.
24. Busschbach J, Weijnen T, Nieuwenhuizen M, et al. A comparison of EQ-5D time trade-off values obtained in Germany, the United Kingdom, and Spain. In: Brooks R, Rabin R, Fde Charro F., eds. The Measurement and Valuation of Health Status using EQ-5D: A European Perspective. Evidence From the EuroQol BIOMED Research Programme. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic ; 2003. p 143-165.
25. Furlong WJ, Feeny DH, Torrance GW et al. Multiplicative Multi-Attribute Utility Function for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) System: A Technical Report. Hamilton (ON): McMaster University Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper No. 98-11; 1998.
26. Wang Q, Chen G. The health status of the Singaporean population as measured by a multiattribute health status system. Singapore Med J. 1999 ; 40: 389-396.
27. Furlong WJ, Feeny DH, Torrance GW, Barr RD. The Health Utilities Index (HUI) system for assessing health-related quality of life in clinical studies. Ann Med. 2001 ; 33: 375-384.
28. Horsman J, Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance G. Index (HUI(R)): concepts, measurement properties and applications. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003 ; 16 (1). 54-54.
29. Badia X, Fernandez E, Segura A. Influence of socio-demographic and health status variables on evaluation of health states in a Spanish population. Eur J Public Health. 1995 ; 5: 87-93.
30. Bjork S, Norinder A. The weighting exercise for the Swedish version of the EuroQol. Health Econ. 1999 ; 8: 117-126.
31. Johnson JA, Coons SJ, Ergo A, Szava-Kovats G. Valuation of EuroQOL (EQ-5D) health states in an adult US sample. Pharmacoeconomics. 1998 ; 13: 421-433.
32. Shaw JW, Johnson JA, Coons SJ. US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: development and testing of the D1 valuation model. Med Care. 2005 ; 43: 203-220.