Impact of the Scale Upper Anchor on Health State Preferences

Author:

King Joseph T.1,Tsevat Joel2,Roberts Mark S.3

Affiliation:

1. Section of Neurosurgery, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut, , Department of Neurosurgery, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut

2. Section of Outcomes Research, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, Center for Clinical Effectiveness, Institute for the Study of Health, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio

3. Section of Decision Sciences and Clinical Systems Modeling, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Abstract

Background . Some studies of patient preferences use a measurement scale with an upper anchor point of ``perfect health'' (``Q scale''), whereas others use ``disease free'' (``q scale''). Different measurement scales can lead to problems with interpreting and comparing study results. In an earlier study of patients with degenerative spine disease, the authors showed systematic differences between preferences measured on the Q v. q scales. They sought to validate the differences in Q and q scale measurements in a separate patient population. Methods . The authors measured preferences for current health in a population of 186 patients with cerebral aneurysms using the standard gamble (SG), time tradeoff (TTO), and willingness to pay (WTP) methods. Values were measured on both the Q and q scales and compared with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The authors used an additive utility model to calculate aneurysm-specific disutility. Results . Q and q scale values were different for the SG (mean values Q : 0.77, q : 0.80, P = 0.034), TTO (Q : 0.79, q : 0.81, P = 0.065), and WTP (Q : $117,600, q : $94,500, P < 0.001). Preference values were consistent with patients valuing perfect health more than aneurysm-free health. Cerebral aneurysms accounted for 43% to 86% of total disutility. Conclusions . Similar to earlier findings in patients with a degenerative spine condition, this validation study showed that preferences for current health in patients with cerebral aneurysms are different when measured on the Q and q scales. Investigators should be mindful of the impact of the scale's upper anchor point on preference values when conducting and interpreting preference studies.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Policy

Cited by 7 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3