Impact of the Scale Upper Anchor on Health State Preferences

Joseph T. King, Joel Tsevat and Mark S. Roberts
Additional contact information
Joseph T. King: Section of Neurosurgery, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut, Joseph.KingJr@va.gov, Department of Neurosurgery, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
Joel Tsevat: 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
Mark S. Roberts: 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

Medical Decision Making, 2009, vol. 29, issue 2, 257-266

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

Keywords: aneurysm (cerebral); preferences; standard gamble; time trade-off; utility; willingness to pay. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2009
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X08326148 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:29:y:2009:i:2:p:257-266

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08326148

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().