Using conjoint analysis to estimate healthy-year equivalents for acute conditions: An application to vasomotor symptoms

Value in Health

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 146-152

  Johnson, F Reed ^a   Hauber, A Brett ^a   Özdemir, Semra ^a  

^a RTI HEALTH SOLUTIONS   (United States)

Author keywords

Conjoint analysis; Health state utility; Satisfaction; Trade offs; Utility assessment; Women's health

Indexed keywords

ACUTE DISEASE; ADRENERGIC SYSTEM; ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE DURATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEALTH SURVEY; HOT FLUSH; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MORBIDITY; NIGHT SWEAT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; ESTROGEN REPLACEMENT THERAPY; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEYS; HOT FLASHES; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS;

EID: 58849091878     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00391.x     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Bala MV, Zarkin GA. Are QALYs an appropriate measure for valuing morbidity in acute diseases? Health Econ 2000 9 : 177 80.
2. Feeny DH, Torrance GW. Incorporating utility based quality of life assessment measures in clinical trials. Med Care 1989 27 (Suppl. S190 204.
3. Lenert LA, Cher DJ, Goldstein MK, et al. The effect of search procedures on utility elicitations. Med Decis Making 1998 18 : 76 83.
4. Jansen SJT, Stigglebout AM, Wakker PP, et al. Patients utilities for cancer treatments: a study of the chained procedure for standard gamble and time trade off. Med Decis Making 1998 18 : 391 9.
5. Torrance GW, Feeny D, Furlong W. Visual analog scales: do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states? Med Decis Making 2001 21 : 329 34.
6. Von-Neumann J, Morgenstern O. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press, 1944.
7. Torrance GW Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: a review. J Health Econ 1986 5 : 1 30.
8. Krupnick A, Alberini A, Cropper M, et al. Age, health and willingness to pay for mortality risk reductions: a contingent valuation survey of Ontario residents. J Risk Uncertain 2002 24 : 161 86.
9. Featherstonhaugh D, Slovic P, Johnson SM, Friedrich J. Insensitivity to the value of a human life: a study of psychological numbing. J Risk Uncert 1997 14 : 301 09.
10. Torrance GW, Thomas WH, Sackett DL. A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programs. Health Serv Res 1972 7 : 118 33.
11. MacKeigan LD, Gafni A, O'Brien B. Double discounting of QALYs. Health Econ 2003 12 : 165 9.
12. Mehrez A, Gafni A. Quality-adjusted life years, utility theory, and healthy-years equivalents. Med Decis Making 1989 9 : 142 9.
13. Gafni A, Birch S, Mehrez A. Economics, health and health economics: HYEs versus QALYs. J Health Econ 1993 12 : 325 39.
14. Gafni A, Birch S. Preferences for outcomes in economic evaluation: an economic approach to addressing economic problems. Soc Sci Med 1995 40 : 767 76.
15. Cattin P, Wittink D. Commercial use of conjoint analysis: a survey. J Market 1982 46 : 44 53.
16. Louviere J. Conjoint analysis modeling of stated preferences: a review of theory, methods, recent developments and external validity. J Transport Econ Policy 1988 10 : 93 119.
17. Bateman I, Carson R, Day B., et al. Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques. Cheltenham : Edward Elgar, 2002.
18. Bennett J, Adamowicz V. Some fundamentals of environmental choice modeling. In : Bennett J., Blamey R, eds. The Choice Modeling Approach to Environmental Valuation. Cheltenham : Edward Elgar, 2001.
19. Holmes T, Adamowicz V. Attribute-based methods. In : Champ P, Boyle K, Brown T, eds. A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Norwell : Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003.
20. Louviere J, Swait J, Hensher D. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2000.
21. Ryan M, Gerard K. Discrete choice experiments. In : Fayers P, Hays R, eds. Assessing Quality of Life in Clinical Trials: Methods and Practice (2nd ed Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2005.
22. McFadden D. Econometric models of probabilistic choice. In : Manski CF, McFadden D, eds. Structural Analysis of Discrete Data. Cambridge : MIT Press, 1981.
23. Johnson FR, Ozdemir S, Mansfield C, et al. Crohn's disease patients' risk-benefit preferences: serious adverse event risks versus treatment efficacy. Gastroenterology 2007 133 : 769 79.
24. Shaw C. The perimenopausal hot flash: epidemiology, physiology, and treatment. Nurse Pract 1997 22 : 55 66.
25. Johnson FR, Ozdemir S, Hauber AB, Kauf T. Women's willingness to accept perceived risks for vasomotor symptom relief. J Women Health 2007 16 : 1028 40.
26. Dey A. Orthogonal Fractional Factorial Designs. New York : Halstead Press, 1985.
27. Kuhfeld WF, Garratt M, Tobias RD. Efficient experimental design with marketing research applications. J Marketing Res 1994 31 : 545 57.
28. Huber J, Zwerina KB. The Importance of utility balance in efficient choice designs. J Marketing Res 1996 33 : 307 17.
29. Harris Interactive. Who we are. Available from: http://www. harrisinteractive.com/about/ [Accessed February 10, 2004 WB. Econometric Analysis. New York : Prentice Hall, 2000.
30. US Bureau of the Census. Current Population Survey. Washington DC : US Bureau of the Census, 2004.
31. Brennan RM, Crespo CJ, Wactaeski-Wende J. Health behaviors and other characteristics of women on hormone therapy: results from the Third National Health and nutrition Examination Survey, 1988-1994. Menopause 2004 11 : 536 42.
32. Weinstein MC, Schiff I. Cost-effectiveness of hormone replacement therapy in menopause. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1983 38 : 445 55.
33. Daly E, Gray A, Barlow D, et al. Measuring the impact of menopausal symptoms on quality of life. BMJ 1993 307 : 836 40.
34. Zethraeus N, Johannesson M, Henriksson P, Strand RT. The impact of hormone replacement therapy on quality of life and willingness to pay. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1997 104 : 1191 5.