IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v22y2002i1_supplp102-114.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measurement of Health Preferences among Patients with Tuberculous Infection and Disease

Author

Listed:
  • Marie-Josée Dion
  • Pierre Tousignant
  • Jean Bourbeau
  • Dick Menzies
  • Kevin Schwartzman

Abstract

Health preferences have not previously been investigated among patients with tuberculous infection or disease. The authors assessed the reliability of visual analogue scale (VAS) and standard gamble (SG) measurements in this patient population. Participants were interviewed 3 times in English or French, at weekly intervals. They evaluated their own health status, as well as 3 marker health states, derived by consensus among tuberculosis (TB) practitioners. For the VAS, health states were assigned a duration of 6 months, whereas for the SG, the duration was 10 years. One hundred eighty-six potentially eligible individuals were identified from the TB clinic database of the Montreal Chest Institute. One hundred twelve (60%) were successfully located; of these, 106 were confirmed eligible. Sixty-seven (63%) agreed to participate, and 50 completed all study measurements (25 treated for latent TB, 17 treated for active TB, and 8 with previous active TB); 38 out of 50 were foreign-born. Intraclass correlation coefficients for the marker states were 0.57 to 0.81 for the VAS, and 0.75 to 0.87 for the SG. For respondents’ own health, the coefficients were 0.60 and 0.87, respectively. Median VAS scores for respondents’ own health were 85.0 to 88.0 for the 3 interviews, whereas the median utility score was 97.5 for all 3. Administration of the visual analogue scale and standard gamble instruments appeared reliable in a selected group of tuberculosis patients. Major barriers to recruitment were language and mobility in this largely foreign-born population.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie-Josée Dion & Pierre Tousignant & Jean Bourbeau & Dick Menzies & Kevin Schwartzman, 2002. "Measurement of Health Preferences among Patients with Tuberculous Infection and Disease," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(1_suppl), pages 102-114, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:22:y:2002:i:1_suppl:p:102-114
    DOI: 10.1177/027298902237706
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/027298902237706
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/027298902237706?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John C. Hershey & Howard C. Kunreuther & Paul J. H. Schoemaker, 1982. "Sources of Bias in Assessment Procedures for Utility Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(8), pages 936-954, August.
    2. George W. Torrance & Michael H. Boyle & Sargent P. Horwood, 1982. "Application of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory to Measure Social Preferences for Health States," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1043-1069, December.
    3. Peep F. M. Stalmeier & M. K. Goldstein & A. M. Holmes & L. Lenert & J. Miyamoto & A. M. Stiggelbout & G. W. Torrance & J. Tsevat, 2001. "What Should Be Reported in a Methods Section on Utility Assessment?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(3), pages 200-207, May.
    4. Robinson, Angela & Dolan, Paul & Williams, Alan, 1997. "Valuing health status using VAS and TTO: What lies behind the numbers?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1289-1297, October.
    5. Torrance, George W., 1986. "Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal : A review," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 1-30, March.
    6. George W. Torrance & David Feeny & William Furlong, 2001. "Visual Analog Scales," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(4), pages 329-334, August.
    7. Torrance, George W., 1976. "Social preferences for health states: An empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 129-136.
    8. Dolan, Paul & Kind, Paul, 1996. "Inconsistency and health state valuations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 609-615, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shilanthi Seneviratne & Samitha Ginige & Sanjeewa Kularatna & Nalika Gunawardena, 2022. "Cultural Adaptation, Translation and Validation of Tuberculosis Specific Health Related Quality of Life Measuring Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Tuberculosis (FACIT-TB) Scale in Sri ," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(2), pages 579-592, April.
    2. Wanitchaya Kittikraisak & Pritaporn Kingkaew & Yot Teerawattananon & Jomkwan Yothasamut & Supalert Natesuwan & Weerawat Manosuthi & Virasakdi Chongsuvivatwong & Sara J Whitehead, 2012. "Health Related Quality of Life among Patients with Tuberculosis and HIV in Thailand," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(1), pages 1-8, January.
    3. Douglas K. Owens, 2002. "Analytic Tools for Public Health Decision Making," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(1_suppl), pages 3-10, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bromley, Hannah L. & Petrie, Dennis & Mann, G.Bruce & Nickson, Carolyn & Rea, Daniel & Roberts, Tracy E., 2019. "Valuing the health states associated with breast cancer screening programmes: A systematic review of economic measures," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 142-154.
    2. David Feeny, 2012. "The Multi-attribute Utility Approach to Assessing Health-related Quality of Life," Chapters, in: Andrew M. Jones (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Health Economics, Second Edition, chapter 36, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Peep F. M. Stalmeier & Jan J. V. Busschbach & Leida M. Lamers & Paul F. M. Krabbe, 2005. "The gap effect: discontinuities of preferences around dead," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(7), pages 679-685, July.
    4. David Parkin & Nancy Devlin, 2006. "Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost‐utility analysis?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(7), pages 653-664, July.
    5. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Mandakovic, Tomislav & Gupta, Sushil K. & Sahay, Sundeep & Hong, Sungwan, 1995. "A review of program evaluation and fund allocation methods within the service and government sectors," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 59-79, March.
    6. Blumenschein, Karen & Johannesson, Magnus, 1998. "An experimental test of question framing in health state utility assessment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 187-193, September.
    7. George W. Torrance & David Feeny & William Furlong, 2001. "Visual Analog Scales," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(4), pages 329-334, August.
    8. Peter Hertzman, 2005. "The cost effectiveness of orlistat in a 1-year weight-management programme for treating overweight and obese patients in Sweden," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 1007-1020, October.
    9. Herrera-Araujo, Daniel & Hammitt, James K. & Rheinberger, Christoph M., 2020. "Theoretical bounds on the value of improved health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    10. D. Stratmann‐Schoene & T. Kuehn & R. Kreienberg & R. Leidl, 2006. "A preference‐based index for the SF‐12," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 553-564, June.
    11. A. David Paltiel & Kenneth A. Freedberg, 1998. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing Cytomegalovirus Disease in AIDS Patients," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 34-51, June.
    12. Heather J. Sutherland & Virginia Dunn & Norman F. Boyd, 1983. "Measurement of Values for States of Health with Linear Analog Scales," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 3(4), pages 477-487, December.
    13. Katherine J. Stevens & Christopher J. McCabe & John E. Brazier, 2006. "Mapping between Visual Analogue Scale and Standard Gamble data; results from the UK Health Utilities Index 2 valuation survey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 527-533, May.
    14. F. E. van Nooten & X. Koolman & W. B. F. Brouwer, 2009. "The influence of subjective life expectancy on health state valuations using a 10 year TTO," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(5), pages 549-558, May.
    15. Arthur E. Attema & Werner B.F. Brouwer, 2014. "Deriving Time Discounting Correction Factors For Tto Tariffs," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(4), pages 410-425, April.
    16. Paula K. Lorgelly & Kenny D. Lawson & Elisabeth A.L. Fenwick & Andrew H. Briggs, 2010. "Outcome Measurement in Economic Evaluations of Public Health Interventions: a Role for the Capability Approach?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-16, May.
    17. Dolan, Paul, 1996. "Modelling valuations for health states: the effect of duration," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 189-203, December.
    18. Levy, Moshe & Nir, Adi Rizansky, 2012. "The utility of health and wealth," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 379-392.
    19. Claire Gudex & Paul Kind & Harmanna van Dalen & Mary-Alison Durand & Jenny Morris & Alan Williams, 1993. "Comparing scaling methods for health state valuations - Rosser revisited," Working Papers 107chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    20. Eve Wittenberg & Lisa Prosser, 2011. "Ordering errors, objections and invariance in utility survey responses," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 225-241, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:22:y:2002:i:1_suppl:p:102-114. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.