IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v28y2008i2p220-232.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Health State Valuation in Mild to Moderate Cognitive Impairment: Feasibility of Computer-Based, Direct Patient Utility Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Neal V. Dawson

    (Department of Medicine, University Memory and Aging Center, nvd@po.cwru.edu, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University Memory and Aging Center, Center for Health Care Research and Policy at MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio)

  • Mendel E. Singer

    (University Memory and Aging Center, Center for Health Care Research and Policy at MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio)

  • Leslie Lenert

    (Department of Medicine, University Memory and Aging Center, HSR&D Service of the VA San Diego Health System, San Diego, California)

  • Marian B. Patterson

    (Department of Medicine, University Memory and Aging Center)

  • Susie A. Sami

    (University Memory and Aging Center)

  • Iahn Gonsenhouser

    (University Memory and Aging Center)

  • Heather A. Lindstrom

    (University Memory and Aging Center)

  • Kathleen A. Smyth

    (University Memory and Aging Center)

  • Melissa J. Barber

    (University Memory and Aging Center)

  • Peter J. Whitehouse

    (University Memory and Aging Center, Departments of Neurology, Cognitive Science, Psychiatry, Neuroscience, Psychology, Nursing, Organizational Behavior, and History Case Western University, Cleveland, Ohio)

Abstract

Background. Most patients with dementia will, at some point, need a proxy health care decision maker. It is unknown whether persons with various degrees of cognitive impairment can reliably report their health-related preferences. Methods. The authors performed health state valuations (HSVs) of current and hypothetical future health states on 47 pairs of patients with mild to moderate cognitive impairment and their caregivers using computer-based standard gamble, time tradeoff, and rating scale techniques. Results. Patients' mean (SD) age was 74.6 (9.3) years. About half of the patients were women (48%), as were most caregivers (73%), who were on average younger (mean age= 66.2 years, SD= 12.2). Most participants were white (83%); 17% were African American. The mean (SD) Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score of patients was 24.2 (4.6) of 30. All caregivers and 77% of patients (36/47) completed all 18 components of the HSV exercise. Patients who completed the HSV exercise were slightly younger (mean age [SD]= 74.1 [8.5] v. 75.9 [11.8]; P = 0.569) and had significantly higher MMSE scores (mean score [SD] = 25.0 [4.3] v. 21.4 [4.4]; P = 0.018). Although MMSE scores below 20 did not preclude the completion of all 18 HSV ratings, being classified as having moderate cognitive impairment was associated with a lower likelihood of completing all scenario ratings (44% v. 82%). Patient and caregiver responses showed good consistency across time and across techniques and were logically consistent. Conclusion. Obtaining HSVs for current and hypothetical health states was feasible for most patients with mild cognitive impairment and many with moderate cognitive impairment. HSV assessments were consistent and reasonable.

Suggested Citation

  • Neal V. Dawson & Mendel E. Singer & Leslie Lenert & Marian B. Patterson & Susie A. Sami & Iahn Gonsenhouser & Heather A. Lindstrom & Kathleen A. Smyth & Melissa J. Barber & Peter J. Whitehouse, 2008. "Health State Valuation in Mild to Moderate Cognitive Impairment: Feasibility of Computer-Based, Direct Patient Utility Assessment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(2), pages 220-232, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:28:y:2008:i:2:p:220-232
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X07311750
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X07311750
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X07311750?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. Sylvie M. C. van Osch & Peter P. Wakker & Wilbert B. van den Hout & Anne M. Stiggelbout, 2004. "Correcting Biases in Standard Gamble and Time Tradeoff Utilities," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 24(5), pages 511-517, October.
    2. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, September.
    3. L. A. Lenert & A. Sturley & M. E. Watson, 2002. "iMPACT3: Internet-Based Development and Administration of Utility Elicitation Protocols," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(6), pages 464-474, December.
    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. Michaël Schwarzinger & Fabrice Carrat & Stéphane Luchini, 2009. ""If you have the flu symptoms, your asymptomatic spouse may better answer the willingness-to-pay question". Evidence from a double-bounded dichotomous choice model with heterogeneous anchori," Post-Print inserm-00636179, HAL.
    2. Schwarzinger, Michaël & Carrat, Fabrice & Luchini, Stéphane, 2009. ""If you have the flu symptoms, your asymptomatic spouse may better answer the willingness-to-pay question": Evidence from a double-bounded dichotomous choice model with heterogeneous anchori," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 873-884, July.

    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. Yuval Rottenstreich & Alex Markle & Johannes Müller-Trede, 2023. "Risky Sure Things," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(8), pages 4707-4720, August.
    2. KARRI PASANEN & MIKKO KURTTILA & JOUNI PYKÄlÄINEN & JYRKI KANGAS & PEKKA LESKINEN, 2005. "Mesta — Non-Industrial Private Forest Owners' Decision-Support Environment For The Evaluation Of Alternative Forest Plans Over The Internet," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(04), pages 601-620.
    3. Gerd Gigerenzer, 1997. "Bounded Rationality: Models of Fast and Frugal Inference," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 133(II), pages 201-218, June.
    4. Shuang Liu & Kirsten Maclean & Cathy Robinson, 2019. "A cost-effective framework to prioritise stakeholder participation options," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(3), pages 221-241, November.
    5. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    6. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Sobhani, Anae & Szép, Teodóra, 2021. "Obfuscation maximization-based decision-making: Theory, methodology and first empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 28-44.
    7. Perrels, Adriaan & Molarius, Riitta & Porthin, Markus & Rosqvist, Tony, 2008. "Testing a Flood Protection Case by Means of a Group Decision Support System," Discussion Papers 449, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    8. Ahrens, Heinz & Kantelhardt, Jochen, 2007. "Integrating Ecological And Economic Aspects In Land Use Concepts: Some Conclusions From A Regional Land Use Concept For Bayerisches Donauried," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7986, Agricultural Economics Society.
    9. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.
    10. J-B Yang & D-L Xu & X Xie & A K Maddulapalli, 2011. "Multicriteria evidential reasoning decision modelling and analysis—prioritizing voices of customer," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(9), pages 1638-1654, September.
    11. Lupo, Toni, 2015. "Fuzzy ServPerf model combined with ELECTRE III to comparatively evaluate service quality of international airports in Sicily," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 249-259.
    12. Guo, Mengzhuo & Zhang, Qingpeng & Liao, Xiuwu & Chen, Frank Youhua & Zeng, Daniel Dajun, 2021. "A hybrid machine learning framework for analyzing human decision-making through learning preferences," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    13. Viral Gupta & P. K. Kapur & Deepak Kumar, 2019. "Prioritizing and Optimizing Disaster Recovery Solution using Analytic Network Process and Multi Attribute Utility Theory," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 171-207, January.
    14. Florian Methling & Rüdiger Nitzsch, 2019. "Thematic portfolio optimization: challenging the core satellite approach," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 33(2), pages 133-154, June.
    15. Rogerson, Ellen C. & Lambert, James H., 2012. "Prioritizing risks via several expert perspectives with application to runway safety," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 22-34.
    16. Figueira, Jose & Roy, Bernard, 2002. "Determining the weights of criteria in the ELECTRE type methods with a revised Simos' procedure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 317-326, June.
    17. P. S. Nagpaul & Santanu Roy, 2003. "Constructing a multi-objective measure of research performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 56(3), pages 383-402, March.
    18. Robin Gregory & Ralph L. Keeney, 2017. "A Practical Approach to Address Uncertainty in Stakeholder Deliberations," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 487-501, March.
    19. Kadziński, Miłosz & Wójcik, Michał & Ciomek, Krzysztof, 2022. "Review and experimental comparison of ranking and choice procedures for constructing a univocal recommendation in a preference disaggregation setting," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    20. Huber, Joel & Viscusi, W. Kip & Bell, Jason, 2008. "Reference dependence in iterative choices," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 143-152, 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:28:y:2008:i:2:p:220-232. 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.