Multi-attribute utility function or statistical inference models: A comparison of health state valuation models using the HUI2 health state classification system

Journal of Health Economics

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 992-1002

  Stevens, Katherine ^a   McCabe, Christopher ^b   Brazier, John ^a   Roberts, Jennifer ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Health utilities index; Health related quality of life; Predictive validity; Valuation functions

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; HEALTH STATUS; RESEARCH WORK; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; PERFORMANCE; PREDICTION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; VALIDATION PROCESS;

DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, THEORETICAL;

EID: 34547759199     PISSN: 01676296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2006.12.007     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Bleichrodt H., and Johannesson M. An experimental test of a theoretical foundation for rating scale valuations. Medical Decision Making 17 (1997) 208-216
2. Brazier J.E., Deverill M., Green C., Harper R., and Booth A. A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation. Health Technology Assessment 3 (1999), NCCHTA, Southampton
3. Brazier J., Roberts J., and Deverill M. The estimation of a preference based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics 21 (2002) 271-292
4. Currim I.S., and Sarin R.K. A comparative evaluation of multi-attribute consumer preference models. Management Science 30 (1984) 543-561
5. Dolan P. Modelling valuations for EuroQol Health States. Medical Care 35 (1997) 1095-1108
6. Dolan P. Modelling the relationship between the description and valuation of health states. In: Murray C.K.L., Salomon J.A., Mathers C.D., and Loped A.D. (Eds). Summary Measures of Population Health: Concepts, Ethics, Measurement and Applications (2002), World Health Organisation, Geneva 501-514
7. Dolan P., and Sutton M. Mapping Visual analogue scale health state valuations on to standard gamble and time trade off values. Social Science and Medicine 44 (1997) 1519-1530
8. Drummond M.F. Introducing economic and quality of life measurements into clinical studies. Annals of Medicine 33 (2001) 344-349
9. Dyer J.S., and Sarin R.K. Relative risk aversion. Management Science 28 8 (1982) 875-886
10. Feeny D., Furlong W., Torrance G.W., Goldsmith C.H., Zhu Z., DePauw S., Denton M., and Boyle M. Multiattribute and single attribute utility functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 system. Medical Care 40 (2002) 113-128
11. Feeny D. Comparing and contrasting utilities and willingness to pay. In: Lenderking W.R., and Revicki D.A. (Eds). Advancing Health Outcomes Research Methods and Clinical Applications (2005), Degnon Associates, McLean, VA 353-367
12. Keeney R.L., and Raiffa H. Decisions With Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs (1976), Wiley, New York
13. Lloyd A.J. Threats to the estimation of benefit: are preference elicitation methods accurate?. Health Economics 12 (2003) 393-402
14. McCabe C., Stevens K., Roberts J., and Brazier J.E. Health State Values for the Health Utilities Index Mark 2 descriptive system: results from a UK valuation survey. Health Economics 14 3 (2005) 231-244
15. McCabe C., Stevens K., and Brazier J.E. Utility scores for the Health Utilities Index Mark 2: an empirical assessment of alternative mapping functions. Medical Care 43 (2005) 627-635
16. Miller, G.A., 1956. The magical number seven plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity to process information. Psychological Review 63, 81-97. Cited in: Fischer, G.W., 1978. Utility Models for multiple objective decisions: do they represent human preferences? Decision Sciences 10, 451-479.
17. Richardson J., Day N., Peacock S., and Lezzi A. Measure of the quality of life for economics evaluation and the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) Mark 2 instrument. The Australian Economic Review 37 1 (2004) 62-88
18. Robinson A., Loomes G., and Jones-Lee M. Visual analogue scales, standard gambles and relative risk aversion. Medical Decision Making 21 (2001) 17-27
19. Schoemaker P.H.J. The expected utility model: its variants, purposes, evidence and limitations. Journal of Economic Literature 20 (1982) 529-563
20. Torrance G.W., Feeny D., and Furlong W. Visual Analogue Scales: do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states?. Medical Decision Making 21 (2001) 329-334
21. Torrance G.W., Feeny D.H., Furlong W.J., Barr R.D., Zhang Y., and Wang Q. A multi-attribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system: Health Utilities Mark 2. Medical Care 34 (1996) 702-722
22. Torrance, G.W., Zhang, Y., Feeny, D., Furlong, W., Barr, R., September 1992. Multi-attribute preference functions for a comprehensive health status classification system. McMaster University Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper #92-18.