On the assessment of preferences for health and duration: Maximal endurable time and better than dead preferences

Medical Care

Volumn 45, Issue 9, 2007, Pages 835-841

  Stalmeier, Peep F M ^a,c   Lamers, Leida M ^b   Busschbach, Jan J V ^b   Krabbe, Paul F M ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Decision analysis; Health economics; Preferences; QALY; Utilities; Values

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO DEATH; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PSYCHOMETRY; SOCIOECONOMICS;

ADULT; ATTITUDE TO DEATH; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PSYCHOMETRICS; VALUE OF LIFE;

EID: 34548106908     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3180ca9ac5     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 1996.
2. Drummond MF, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL, et al. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 2nd ed. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 1997.
3. O'Callahan JG, Fink C, Pitts LH, et al. Withholding and withdrawing of life support from patients with severe head injury. Crit Care Med. 1995;23:1567-1575.
4. Althabe M, Cardigni G, Vassallo JC, et al. Dying in the intensive care unit: collaborative multicenter study about forgoing life-sustaining treatment in Argentine pediatric intensive care units. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2003;4:164-169.
5. de Vos R, Oosterom L, Koster RW, et al. Decisions to terminate resuscitation. Resuscitation. 1998;39:7-13.
6. de Vos R, Koster RW, de Haan RJ. Impact of survival probability, life expectancy, quality of life and patient preferences on do-not-attempt- resuscitation orders in a hospital. Resuscitation. 1998;39:15-21.
7. Hilden HM, Louhiala P, Honkasalo ML, et al. Finnish nurses' views on end-of-life discussions and a comparison with physicians' views. Nurs Ethics. 2004;11:165-178.
8. Tsuchiya A, Dolan P. The QALY model and individual preferences for health states and health profiles over time: a systematic review of the literature. Med Decis Making. 2005;25:460-467.
9. Sutherland HJ, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Boyd NF, et al. Attitudes toward quality of survival. The concept of "Maximal Endurable Time". Med Decis Making. 1982;2:299-309.
10. Dolan P, Stalmeier PFM. The validity of time trade-off values in calculating QALYs: constant proportional time trade-off versus the proportional heuristic. J Health Econ. 2003;22:445-458.
11. Robinson A, Spencer A. Exploring challenges to TTO utilities: valuing states worse than dead. Health Econ. 2006;15:393-402.
12. Stalmeier PFM, Chapman GB, de Boer AG, et al. A fallacy of the multiplicative QALY model for low quality weights in students and patients judging hypothetical health states. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001;17:488-496.
13. 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.
14. Macran S, Kind P. "Death" and the valuation of health-related quality of life. Med Care. 2001;39:217-227.
15. Torrance GW, Boyle MH, Horwood SP. Application of multi-attribute utility theory to measure social preferences for health states. Oper Res. 1982;30:1043-1069.
16. Dolan P, Roberts J. To what extent can we explain time trade-off values from other information about respondents. Soc Sci Med. 2002;54:919-929.
17. 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, Charro Fd, eds. The Measurement and Valuation of Health Status Using EQ-5D: A European Perspective. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2003:143-165.
18. Lamers LM, McDonnell J, Stalmeier PFM, et al. The Dutch tariff: results and arguments for an effective design for national EQ-5D valuation studies. Health Econ. 2006;15:1121-1132.
19. Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy. 1996;37:53-72.
20. Krabbe PF, Stalmeier PFM, Lamers LM, et al. Testing the interval-level measurement property of multi-item visual analogue scales. Qual Life Res. 2006;15:1651-1661.
21. Stalmeier PFM, Wakker PP, Bezembinder TGG. Preference reversals: violations of unidimensional procedure invariance. J Exp Psychol Hum Percep Perform. 1997;23:1196-1205.
22. Collett D. Modelling Binary Data. London, England: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press; 2003.
23. SAS -[computer program]. Version 8.2. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC; 2001.
24. Naimark D, Krahn MD, Naglie G, et al. Primer on medical decision analysis: part 5-working with Markov processes. Med Decis Making. 1997;17:152-159.
25. Zinnes JL, Griggs RA. Probabilistic multidimensional unfolding analysis. Psychometrika. 1974;39:327-350.
26. Louvier JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
27. Salomon JA. Reconsidering the use of rankings in the valuation of health states: a model for estimating cardinal values from ordinal data. Popul Health Metr. 2003;1:12.
28. Kievit W, Welsing PM, Adang EM, et al. Comment on the use of self-reporting instruments to assess patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the longitudinal association between the DAS28 and the VAS general health. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;55:745-750.