|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Unstable Preferences:
A Shift in Valuation or an Effect of the Elicitation Procedure?
Sylvia J.T. Jansen, MA
Anne M. Stiggelbout, PhD
Peter P. Wakker, PhD
Marianne A. Nooij, MD
Evert M. Noordijk, MD, PhD
Job Kievit, MD, PhD
Objective. Many studies suggest that impaired health states are valued more positively when experienced than when hypothetical. This study investigated to what extent this discrepancy occurs and examined four possible explanations: non-corresponding description of the hypothetical health state, new understanding due to experience with the health state, valuation shift due to a new status quo, and instability of preference. Patients and methods. Fifty-five breast cancer patients evaluated their actually experienced health state, a radiotherapy scenario, and a chemotherapy control scenario before, during, and after postoperative radiotherapy. Utilities were elicited by means of a visual analog scale (VAS), a chained time tradeoff (TTO), and a chained standard gamble (SG). Results. The discrepancy was found for all methods and was statistically significant for the TTO (predicted utilities: 0.89, actual utilities: 0.92, p  0.05). During radiotherapy, significant differences (p 0.01) were found between the utilities for the radiotherapy scenario and the actual health state by means of the VAS and the SG, suggesting non-corresponding description as an explanation. The utilities of the radiotherapy scenario and the chemotherapy control scenario remained stable over time, and thus new understanding, valuation shift, and instability could be ruled out as explanations. Conclusion. Utilities obtained through hypothetical scenarios may not be valid predictors of the value judgments of actually experienced health states. The discrepancy in this study seems to have been due to differences between the situations in question (non-corresponding descriptions). Key words: stability; utility assessment; standard gamble; time tradeoff; breast cancer; chemotherapy; radiotherapy. (Med Decis Making 2000;20:62-71)
Medical Decision Making, Vol. 20, No. 1,
62-71 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0002000108
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
Y. Peeters and A. M. Stiggelbout
Valuing Health: Does Enriching a Scenario Lead to Higher Utilities?
Med Decis Making,
May 1, 2009;
29(3):
334 - 342.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Sepucha and A. G. Mulley Jr
A Perspective on the Patient's Role in Treatment Decisions
Med Care Res Rev,
February 1, 2009;
66(1_suppl):
53S - 74S.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. H. Ditto, J. A. Jacobson, W. D. Smucker, J. H. Danks, and A. Fagerlin
Context Changes Choices: A Prospective Study of the Effects of Hospitalization on Life-Sustaining Treatment Preferences
Med Decis Making,
July 1, 2006;
26(4):
313 - 322.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. P. Wakker, S. J. T. Jansen, and A. M. Stiggelbout
Anchor Levels as a New Tool for the Theory and Measurement of Multiattribute Utility
Decision Analysis,
December 1, 2004;
1(4):
217 - 234.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Locadia, P. F. M. Stalmeier, F. J. Oort, M. H. Prins, M. A. G. Sprangers, and P. M. M. Bossuyt
A Comparison of 3 Valuation Methods for Temporary Health States in Patients Treated with Oral Anticoagulants
Med Decis Making,
November 1, 2004;
24(6):
625 - 633.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. F. Col, G. Weber, A. Stiggelbout, J. Chuo, R. D'Agostino, and P. Corso
Short-term Menopausal Hormone Therapy for Symptom Relief: An Updated Decision Model
Arch Intern Med,
August 9, 2004;
164(15):
1634 - 1640.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Littenberg, S. Partilo, A. Licata, and M. W. Kattan
Paper Standard Gamble: The Reliability of a Paper Questionnaire to Assess Utility
Med Decis Making,
November 1, 2003;
23(6):
480 - 488.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Baron, D. A. Asch, A. Fagerlin, C. Jepson, G. Loewenstein, J. Riis, M. G. Stineman, and P. A. Ubel
Effect of Assessment Method on the Discrepancy between Judgments of Health Disorders People have and do not have: A Web Study
Med Decis Making,
September 1, 2003;
23(5):
422 - 434.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. B.F. Hulscher, J. W. van Sandick, A. G.E.M. de Boer, B. P.L. Wijnhoven, J. G.P. Tijssen, P. Fockens, P. F.M. Stalmeier, F. J.W. ten Kate, H. van Dekken, H. Obertop, et al.
Extended Transthoracic Resection Compared with Limited Transhiatal Resection for Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus
N. Engl. J. Med.,
November 21, 2002;
347(21):
1662 - 1669.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M.-J. Dion, P. Tousignant, J. Bourbeau, D. Menzies, and K. Schwartzman
Measurement of Health Preferences among Patients with Tuberculous Infection and Disease
Med Decis Making,
October 1, 2002;
22(5_suppl):
S102 - S114.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. F. M. Stalmeier
Discrepancies between Chained and Classic Utilities Induced by Anchoring with Occasional Adjustments
Med Decis Making,
February 1, 2002;
22(1):
53 - 64.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. J. T. Jansen, J. Kievit, M. A. Nooij, and A. M. Stiggelbout
Stability of Patients' Preferences for Chemotherapy: The Impact of Experience
Med Decis Making,
August 1, 2001;
21(4):
295 - 306.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. E Straus and F. McAlister
Applying the results of trials and systematic reviews to our individual patients
Evid. Based Ment. Health,
February 1, 2001;
4(1):
6 - 7.
[Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. Stiggelbout and J. C.J.M. de Haes
Patient Preference for Cancer Therapy: An Overview of Measurement Approaches
J. Clin. Oncol.,
January 1, 2001;
19(1):
220 - 230.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
