IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v28y2008i6p888-898.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the Treatment Tradeoff Method in Rectal Cancer Patients: Is Surgery Preference Related to Outcome Utilities?

Author

Listed:
  • Ercolie R. Bossema

    (Department of Clinical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands, Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands)

  • Corrie A. M. Marijnen

    (Department of Clinical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands, Department of Radiotherapy Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands)

  • Monique C. M. Baas-Thijssen

    (Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands)

  • Cock J. H. van de Velde

    (Department of Surgery (CJHvdV), Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands)

  • Anne M. Stiggelbout

    (Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands, a.m.stiggelbout@ lumc.nl)

Abstract

Background. The treatment tradeoff method (TTM) has been developed specifically for decision making at the level of the individual patient. The task is tailored to the clinical decision problem at hand and may therefore be more relevant to patients than methods of outcome valuation. Despite its wide use in oncology research, few methodological studies regarding validity have been conducted. Objective and Methods. The present study evaluates the validity of the TTM in rectal cancer patients who had undergone either 1 of 2 surgery types: 1 requiring a permanent stoma (stoma group) and 1 involving a postoperative risk of fecal incontinence (no-stoma group). The authors relate the surgery preference scores to the utilities of the 2 main surgery outcome states as well as to their utility difference. Results. Surgery preference was more strongly associated with the utility difference ( r > 0.54 in the total patient group) than with the utilities of the surgery outcome states per se ( r

Suggested Citation

  • Ercolie R. Bossema & Corrie A. M. Marijnen & Monique C. M. Baas-Thijssen & Cock J. H. van de Velde & Anne M. Stiggelbout, 2008. "Evaluation of the Treatment Tradeoff Method in Rectal Cancer Patients: Is Surgery Preference Related to Outcome Utilities?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(6), pages 888-898, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:28:y:2008:i:6:p:888-898
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08317013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X08317013
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X08317013?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
    ---><---

    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:6:p:888-898. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.