The Prevalence, Correlates, and Impact of Logically Inconsistent Preferences in Utility Assessments for Joint Health States in Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9099300 |
|---|---|
| Authors | William Dale (0000-0001-8674-9394, University of Chicago, corresponding author), S Pinar Bilir (0000-0002-5113-3386, University of Chicago, corresponding author), Joshua Hemmerich (University of Chicago, corresponding author), Anirban Basu (0000-0001-6620-8320, University of Chicago), Arthur S Elstein (University of Illinois Chicago), Arthur Elstein, David O Meltzer (0000-0003-2790-7393, University of Chicago), David Meltzer (0000-0002-6728-8729) |
| Year | 2011 |
| Volume | 49 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 59-66 |
| Publication date | 2011-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Medical Care (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0025-7079 • E-ISSN: 1537-1948 |
| Publisher | Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1097/mlr.0b013e3181f37bf2 |
| PMID | 21150801 |
| OpenAlex | W2317917672 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 22 |
BACKGROUND: Variations in health state utilities can impact cost-effectiveness analyses. One potential source of error is when joint health state (JS) utilities are rated higher than the embedded single state (SS) utilities. Knowing when and in whom this occurs can improve cost-effectiveness analyses. METHODS: Men (n = 323) were surveyed at the time of prostate biopsy. Time tradeoff SS and JS utilities for prevalent prostate cancer (PCa) health states were collected. JS utilities assessed included those most prevalent for PCa. "Inconsistency" was defined in the following 3 ways: (1) any size rank order violation; (2) total number of violations; and (3) differences greater than 1 standard deviation (SD). Regression analysis assessed independent patient characteristics associated with inconsistent responses. RESULTS: Aggregate JS utilities were consistent. At the individual level, 36% to 41% of responses violated rank order and 12% to 14% were larger than 1 SD. In all, 69% of respondents had at least 1 JS inconsistency, and 24% had >1 SD inconsistencies. Being married and feeling anxious were independently correlated with giving all types of inconsistent ratings, and lower education correlated with making >SD errors. SS utilities, and not JS utilities, were significantly lower for the inconsistent group. "Correcting" JS inconsistencies decreased aggregate utilities 1 to 9 units. CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistent JS utilities for PCa are prevalent in men at biopsy. Being married, more anxious, and having less education are correlated with inconsistencies. It is the SS utilities, rather than the JS utilities, that differ between consistent and inconsistent raters. Better understanding of the source of these inconsistencies is needed
Aggregate (composite) · Cancer · Feeling · Prostate cancer · Rank (graph theory) · Statistics · Demography · Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Internal Medicine · Mathematics · Medicine · Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare · Psychology · Social Psychology
Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine
Numeracy and Decision Making
Clinical Practice Guidelines and Quality of Care for Older Patients With Multiple Comorbid Diseases
Prospect Theory
The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Response to Lenert and Kaplan
Utilities For Prostate Cancer Health States in Men Aged 60 and Older
Inconsistent responses in three preference-elicitation methods for health states
Inconsistency and health state valuations
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |