IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v33y2013i6p819-838.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient and Societal Value Functions for the Testing Morbidities Index

Author

Listed:
  • J. Shannon Swan
  • Chung Yin Kong
  • Janie M. Lee
  • Omosalewa Itauma
  • Elkan F. Halpern
  • Pablo A. Lee
  • Sergey Vavinskiy
  • Olubunmi Williams
  • Emilie S. Zoltick
  • Karen Donelan

Abstract

Background: We developed preference-based and summated scale scoring for the Testing Morbidities Index (TMI) classification, which addresses short-term effects on quality of life from diagnostic testing before, during, and after testing procedures. Methods: The two TMI preference functions use multiattribute value techniques; one is patient-based and the other has a societal perspective, informed by 206 breast biopsy patients and 466 (societal) subjects. Because of a lack of standard short-term methods for this application, we used the visual analog scale (VAS). Waiting tradeoff (WTO) tolls provided an additional option for linear transformation of the TMI. We randomized participants to 1 of 3 surveys: The first derived weights for generic testing morbidity attributes and levels of severity with the VAS; a second developed VAS values and WTO tolls for linear transformation of the TMI to a “dead-healthy†scale; the third addressed initial validation in a specific test (breast biopsy). The initial validation included 188 patients and 425 community subjects. Direct VAS and WTO values were compared with the TMI. Alternative TMI scoring as a nonpreference summated scale was included, given evidence of construct and content validity. Results: The patient model can use an additive function, whereas the societal model is multiplicative. Direct VAS and the VAS-scaled TMI were correlated across modeling groups (r = 0.45–0.62). Agreement was comparable to the value function validation of the Health Utilities Index 2. Mean absolute difference (MAD) calculations showed a range of 0.07–0.10 in patients and 0.11–0.17 in subjects. MAD for direct WTO tolls compared with the WTO-scaled TMI varied closely around 1 quality-adjusted life day. Conclusions: The TMI shows initial promise in measuring short-term testing-related health states.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Shannon Swan & Chung Yin Kong & Janie M. Lee & Omosalewa Itauma & Elkan F. Halpern & Pablo A. Lee & Sergey Vavinskiy & Olubunmi Williams & Emilie S. Zoltick & Karen Donelan, 2013. "Patient and Societal Value Functions for the Testing Morbidities Index," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(6), pages 819-838, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:33:y:2013:i:6:p:819-838
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X13487605
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X13487605
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X13487605?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. 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.
    2. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, September.
    3. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Lori Curtis & Martin D. Dooley & Ellen L. Lipman & David H. Feeny, "undated". "The Role of Permanent Income and Family Structure in the Determination of Child Health in the Ontario Child Health Study," Canadian International Labour Network Working Papers 16, McMaster University.
    3. 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.
    4. Kobelt, G., 2013. "Health Economics: An Introduction to Economic Evaluation," Monographs, Office of Health Economics, number 000004.
    5. Bernie J. O'Brien & Marian Spath & Gordon Blackhouse & J.L. Severens & Paul Dorian & John Brazier, 2003. "A view from the bridge: agreement between the SF‐6D utility algorithm and the Health Utilities Index," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(11), pages 975-981, November.
    6. Lori J. Curtis & Martin D. Dooley & Ellen L. Lipman & David H. Feeny, 2001. "The role of permanent income and family structure in the determination of child health in Canada," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 287-302, June.
    7. Rodríguez-Míguez, E. & Abellán-Perpiñán, J.M. & Alvarez, X.C. & González, X.M. & Sampayo, A.R., 2016. "The DEP-6D, a new preference-based measure to assess health states of dependency," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 210-219.
    8. Peter P. Wakker & Sylvia J. T. Jansen & Anne M. Stiggelbout, 2004. "Anchor Levels as a New Tool for the Theory and Measurement of Multiattribute Utility," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 217-234, December.
    9. Christine McDonough & Anna Tosteson, 2007. "Measuring Preferences for Cost-Utility Analysis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 93-106, February.
    10. Jeff Richardson & Angelo Iezzi & Kompal Sinha & Munir A. Khan & John Mckie, 2014. "An Instrument For Measuring The Social Willingness To Pay For Health State Improvement," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(7), pages 792-805, July.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Hougaard, Jens Leth & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Østerdal, Lars Peter, 2013. "A new axiomatic approach to the evaluation of population health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 515-523.
    15. 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.
    16. McCabe, Christopher & Brazier, John & Gilks, Peter & Tsuchiya, Aki & Roberts, Jennifer & O'Hagan, Anthony & Stevens, Katherine, 2006. "Using rank data to estimate health state utility models," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 418-431, May.
    17. 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.
    18. David Mayston, "undated". "Developing a Framework Theory for Assessing the Benefits of Careers Guidance," Discussion Papers 02/08, Department of Economics, University of York.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    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:33:y:2013:i:6:p:819-838. 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.