Why people refuse to make tradeoffs in person tradeoff elicitations: A matter of perspective?

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 266-280

  Damschroder, Laura J ^a,b,c   Roberts, Todd R ^b   Zikmund Fisher, Brian J ^a,b   Ubel, Peter A ^a,b  

^a VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer elicitation; Cost effectiveness; Emotion in decision making; Internet survey; Person tradeoff; Utility assessment

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DISEASE SEVERITY; DYSPNEA; E-MAIL; EMOTION; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERNET; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL PRACTICE; PARALYSIS; QUADRIPLEGIA; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TREATMENT REFUSAL;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DATA COLLECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; THERAPEUTICS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34249018592     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X07300601     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Tsevat J., Cook EF, Green ML, et al. Health values of the seriously ill. SUPPORT investigators. Ann Intern Med. 1995 ; 122 (7). 514 - 20.
2. Tsevat J., Dawson NV, Wu AW, et al. Health values of hospitalized patients 80 years or older. JAMA. 1998 ; 279 (5). 371 - 5.
3. McLachlan SA, Pintilie M., Tannock IF Third line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer: an evaluation of quality of life and cost. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1999 ; 54 (3). 213 - 23.
4. Stiggelbout AM, Kiebert GM, Kievit J., Leer JW, Habbema JD, De Haes JC. The ''utility'' of the time trade-off method in cancer patients: feasibility and proportional trade-off. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 ; 48 (10). 1207 - 14.
5. Melsop KA, Boothroyd DB, Hlatky MA Quality of life and time trade-off utility measures in patients with coronary artery disease. Am Heart J. 2003 ; 145: 36 - 41.
6. Perez DJ, Williams SM, Christensen EA, McGee R., Campbell AV A longitudinal study of health related quality of life and utility measures in patients with advanced breast cancer. Qual Life Res. 2001 ; 10: 587 - 53.
7. Chapman GB, Elstein AS, Kuzel TM, et al. Prostate cancer patients' utilities for health states: how it looks depends on where you stand. Med Decis Making. 1998 ; 18 (3). 278 - 86.
8. Handler RM, Hynes LM, Nease RF Jr. Effect of locus of control and consideration of future consequences on time tradeoff utilities for current health. Qual Life Res. 1997 ; 6 (1). 54 - 60.
9. Hollingworth W., Deyo RA, Sullivan SD, Emerson SS The practicality and validity of directly elicited and SF-36 derived health state preferences in patients with low back pain. Health Econ. 2002 ; 11: 71-85.
10. Yi MS, Britto MT, Wilmott RW, et al. Health values of adolescents with cystic fibrosis. J Pediatr. 2003 ; 142 (2). 133 - 40.
11. Perez DJ, McGee R., Campbell AV, Christensen EA, Williams S. A comparison of time trade-off and quality of life measures in patients with advanced cancer. Qual Life Res. 1997 ; 6: 133 - 8.
12. Lewis EF, Johnson PA, Johnson W., Collins C., Griffin L., Stevenson LW Preferences for quality of life or survival expressed by patients with heart failure. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2001 ; 20 (9). 1016 - 24.
13. Stavem K. Quality of life in epilepsy: comparison of four preference measures. Epilepsy Res. 1998 ; 29 (3). 201 - 9.
14. Jones-Lee MW, Loomes G., Philips PR Valuing the Prevention of Non-fatal Road Injuries: Contingent Valuation vs. Standard gambles. London: UK Department of Transport ; 1993.
15. Oliver A. Testing the internal consistency of the lottery equivalents method using health outcomes. Health Econ. 2005 ; 14 (2). 149 - 59.
16. Lalonde L., Clarke AE, Joseph L., Grover SA, Canadian Collaborative Cardiac Assessment Group T. Conventional and chained standard gambles in the assessment of coronary heart disease prevention and treatment. Med Decis Making. 1999 ; 19 (2). 149 - 56.
17. Damschroder LJ, Baron J., Hershey JC, Asch DA, Jepson C., Ubel PA The validity of person tradeoff measurements: randomized trial of computer elicitation versus face-to-face interview. Med Decis Making. 2004 ; 24 (2). 170 - 80.
18. Damschroder LJ, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA The impact of considering adaptation in health state valuation. Soc Sci Med. 2005 ; 61 (2). 267 - 77.
19. Damschroder LJ, Miklosovic ME, Roberts TR, Goldstein CC, Ubel PA Trading people versus trading time: what is the difference ? Popul Health Metr. 2005 ; 3 (1). 10.
20. Arnesen T., Trommald M. Roughly right or precisely wrong? Systematic review of quality-of-life weights elicited with the time trade-off method. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2004 ; 9 (1). 43 - 50.
21. Oliver A. Prioritizing health care: Is ''health'' always an appropriate maximand? Med Decis Making. 2004 ; 24: 272 - 80.
22. McKie J., Richardson J. The rule of rescue. Soc Sci Med. 2003 ; 56 (12). 2407 - 19.
23. Menzel P., Gold MR, Nord E., Pinto-Prades JL, Richardson J., Ubel PA Toward a broader view of values in cost-effectiveness analysis of health. Hastings Cent Rep. 1999 ; 29 (3). 7 - 15.
24. Ubel PA, Loewenstein G., Scanlon D., Kamlet M. Individual utilities are inconsistent with rationing choices: a partial explanation of why Oregon's cost-effectiveness list failed. Med Decis Making. 1996 ; 16 (2). 108 - 16.
25. Pinto-Prades JL Is the person trade-off a valid method for allocating health care resources? Health Econ. 1997 ; 6 (1). 71 - 81.
26. Ubel PA, Richardson J., Prades JL Life-saving treatments and disabilities. Are all QALYs created equal? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1999 ; 15 (4). 738 - 48.
27. Ubel PA, Loewenstein G., Scanlon D., Kamlet M. Value measurement in cost-utility analysis: explaining the discrepancy between rating scale and person trade-off elicitations. Health Policy. 1998 ; 43 (1). 33 - 44.
28. Ubel PA, Richardson J., Baron J. Exploring the role of order effects in person trade-off elicitations. Health Policy. 2002 ; 61 (2). 189 - 99.
29. Olsen JA Persons vs years: two ways of eliciting implicit weights. Health Econ. 1994 ; 3 (1). 39 - 46.
30. Dolan P., Olsen JA, Menzel P., Richardson J. An inquiry into the different perspectives that can be used when eliciting preferences in health. Health Econ. 2003 ; 12 (7). 545 - 51.
31. Ubel PA, Richardson J., Menzel P. Societal value, the person trade-off, and the dilemma of whose values to measure for cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ. 2000 ; 9 (2). 127 - 36.
32. Nord E., Pinto JL, Richardson J., Menzel P., Ubel P. Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes. Health Econ. 1999 ; 8 (1). 25 - 39.
33. Nord E. The person-trade-off approach to valuing health care programs. Med Decis Making. 1995 ; 15 (3). 201 - 8.
34. Salomon JA, Murray CJ A multi-method approach to measuring health-state valuations. Health Econ. 2004 ; 13 (3). 281 - 90. 35. StataCorp. Intercooled Stata 8.2. In. 8.2 ed. College Station (TX): StataCorp LP ; 2004.
35. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein M, eds. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press ; 1996.
36. Devlin NJ, Hansen P., Selai C. Understanding health state valuations: a qualitative analysis of respondents ? Comments. Qual Life Res. 2004 ; 13: 1265 - 77.
37. Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Smith DM, Ubel PA, Fagerlin A. Validation of the subjective numeracy scale (SNS): effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations. Working paper. 2006.
38. Neuberg SL, Newsome JT Personal need for structure: individual differences in the desire for simple structure. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1993 ; 65 (1). 113 - 31.
39. Forsyth D. A taxonomy of ethical ideologies. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1980 ; 39 (1). 175 - 84.
40. Long JS, Freese J. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. Rev ed. College Station (TX): Stata Press ; 2003.
41. Richardson J., Nord E. The importance of perspective in the measurement of quality-adjusted life years. Med Decis Making. 1997 ; 17 (1). 33 - 41.
42. Schwappach DL Are preferences for equality a matter of perspective? Med Decis Making. 2005 ; 25 (4). 449 - 59.
43. Devlin NJ, Hansen P., Kind P., Williams A. Logical inconsistencies in survey respondents' health state valuations-a methodological challenge for estimating social tariffs. Health Econ. 2003 ; 12: 529 - 44.
44. Anderson CJ The psychology of doing nothing: forms of decision avoidance result from reason and emotion. Psychol Bull. 2003 ; 129 (1). 139 - 67.
45. Luce MF Choosing to avoid: coping with negatively emotion-laden consumer decisions. J Consum Res. 1998 ; 24: 409 - 33.
46. Luce MF, Bettman JR, Payne JW Choice processing in emotionally difficult decisions. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1997 ; 23 (2). 384 - 405.
47. Baron J. Protected values. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1997 ; 70 (1). 1 - 16.
48. Fiske AP, Tetlock PE Taboo trade-offs: reactions to transactions to transgress the spheres of justice. Political Psychology. 1997 ; 18 (2). 255 - 97.
49. Kahneman D., Ritov I., Schkade DA Economic preferences or attitude expressions?: An analysis of dollar responses to public issues. J Risk Uncertain. 1999 ; 19 (1). 203 - 35.
50. Couper MP The promise and perils of Web surveys. In: Westlake A, Sykes W, Manners T, Rigg M, eds. The Challenge of the Internet: Proceedings of the 2nd ASC International Conference on Survey Research Methods, 2001 May. p ix-194.
51. Couper MP, Tourangeau R., Steiger DM Social presence in Web surveys. In: CHI '01 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2001 Apr; Seattle, WA.
52. Arnesen TM, Norheim OF Quantifying quality of life for economic analysis: time out for time tradeoff. Med Humanit. 2003 ; 29 (2). 81 - 6.
53. Arnesen T., Trommald M. Are QALYs based on time trade-off comparable? A systematic review of TTO methodologies. Health Econ. 2005 ; 14: 39 - 53.
54. Cairns J., Van der Pol M., Lloyd A. Decision making heuristics and the elicitation of preferences: being fast and frugal about the future. Health Econ. 2002 ; 11 (7). 655-8.