Learning effects in time trade-off based valuation of EQ-5D health states

Value in Health

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 340-345

  Augestad, Liv Ariane ^a   Rand Hendriksen, Kim ^a   Kristiansen, Ivar Sønbø ^b   Stavem, Knut ^a  

^a AKERSHUS UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

learning effect; preferences; time trade off; valuation study

Indexed keywords

AGE; ARTICLE; GENDER; HEALTH STATUS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; VALIDITY;

ADULT; EUROPE; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PREFERENCE; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84858692480     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.10.010     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Krabbe PF, Essink-Bot ML, Bonsel GL. The comparability and reliability of five health-state valuation methods. Soc Sci Med 1997;45:1641-52. (Pubitemid 27511334)
2. Brazier J, Dolan P. Evidence of preference construction in a comparison of variants of the standard gamble method. 2005. Available from: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/10936/. [Accessed April 6, 2011].
3. Bateman IJ, Burgess D, Hutchinson WG, Matthews DI. Learning effects in repeated dichotomous choice contingent valuation questions. In: Royal Economics Society 2004 Annual Conference, University of Swansea, 2004.
4. Drummond MF. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
5. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. Valuing health states: a comparison of methods. J. Health Econ 1996;209-31. (Pubitemid 26290919)
6. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997; 35:1095-108. (Pubitemid 127453463)
7. Norman R, Cronin P, Viney R, et al. International comparisons in valuing EQ-5D health states: a review and analysis. Value Health 2009; 12:1194-200.
8. Golicki D, Jakubczyk M, Niewada M, et al. Valuation of EQ-5D health states in Poland: first TTO-based social value set in central and eastern Europe. Value Health 2010;13:289-97.
9. 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;43:203-20. (Pubitemid 40353904)
10. Lamers LM. The transformation of utilities for health states worse than death: consequences for the estimation of EQ-5D value sets. Med Care 2007;45:238-44.
11. Torrance GW. Health states worse than death. In: Third International Conference on System Science in Health Care. Berlin: Springer, 1984.
12. Stalmeier PF, Busschbach JJ, Lamers LM, Krabbe PF. The gap effect: discontinuities of preferences around dead. Health Econ 2005;14: 679-85. (Pubitemid 40960224)
13. Devlin NJ, Tsuchiya A, Buckingham K, Tilling C. A uniform time trade off method for states better and worse than dead: feasibility study of the "lead time" approach. Health Econ 2011;20:348-61.
14. Slovic P. The construction of preference. Am Psychol 1995;50:364-71.
15. Plott CR. The discovered preference hypothesis. In: Arrow KJ, ed., The Rational Foundations of Economic Behaviour: Proceedings of the IEA Conference Held in Turin, Italy. New York: Macmillan Press, 1996.
16. Poulton EC. Biases in quantitative judgements. Appl Ergon 1982;13: 31-42. (Pubitemid 12136209)
17. Robinson A, Spencer A. Exploring challenges to TTO utilities: valuing states worse than dead. Health Econ 2006;15:393-402.
18. Tilling C, Devlin N, Tsuchiya A, Buckingham K. Protocols for time tradeoff valuations of health states worse than dead: a literature review. Med Decis Making 2010;30:610-9.