Original article
Methodology for measuring health-state preferences—III: Population and context effects

https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(89)90155-8Get rights and content

Abstract

In addition to the scaling method, there are many other aspects of the measurement process that may affect rater judgments of the relative desirability of health states. Although we find little compelling evidence of population differences in preferences due to demographic characteristics, there is some evidence suggesting that medical knowledge and/or experience with illness may influence raters' valuations of health states. Other aspects of the rating process that affect rater judgments can be classified as one of two types: inconsistencies due to limitations in human judgment, and inconsistencies due to situation-specific variables. When inconsistencies are due to limitations in human judgment, such as framing effects, a reasonable solution is to help the rater to see and correct the inconsistency. When inconsistencies are due to situation-specific variables, such as the way the health state is defined and presented, investigators should attempt to standardize conditions across studies.

References (30)

  • D. Cadman et al.

    Construction of social value or utility-based health indices: the usefulness of factorial experimental design plans

    J Chron Dis

    (1986)
  • M. Bergner et al.

    The sickness impact profile: development and final revision of a health status measure

    Med Care

    (1981)
  • D.L. Patrick et al.

    Toward an operational definition of health

    J Health Soc Behav

    (1973)
  • G.W. Torrance et al.

    Application of multi-attribute utility theory to measure social preferences for health states

    Oper Res

    (1982)
  • A.D. Wolfson et al.

    Preference measurements for functional status in stroke patients: interrater and intertechnique comparisons

  • A.M. O'Connor et al.

    Influence of elicitation technique, position order and test-retest error on preferences for alternative cancer drug therapy

  • W.B. Carter et al.

    Validation of and interval scaling: the sickness impact profile

    Health Sere Res

    (1976)
  • R. Rosser et al.

    A scale of evaluations of states of illness: is there a social consensus?

    Int J Epidemiol

    (1978)
  • R.M. Kaplan et al.

    The reliability, stability, and generalizability of a health status index

  • D.L. Sackett et al.

    The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public

    J Chron Dis

    (1978)
  • H. Llewellyn-Thomas et al.

    Methodologic issues in obtaining values for health states

    Med Care

    (1984)
  • R.L. Kane et al.

    Value preferences for nursing home outcomes

    Gerontologist

    (1986)
  • B.J. McNeil et al.

    On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies

    N Engl J Med

    (1982)
  • N.F. Boyd et al.

    A comparison of methods of assessing voice quality in laryngeal cancer

  • D.L. Patrick et al.

    Methods of measuring levels of well-being for a health status index

    Health Serv Res

    (1973)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text