IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v53y2001i10p1275-1285.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A psychometric analysis of the measurement level of the rating scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble

Author

Listed:
  • Cook, Karon F.
  • Ashton, Carol M.
  • Byrne, Margaret M.
  • Brody, Baruch
  • Geraci, Jane
  • Giesler, R. Brian
  • Hanita, Makoto
  • Souchek, Julianne
  • Wray, Nelda P.

Abstract

A fundamental assumption of utility-based analyses is that patient utilities for health states can be measured on an equal-interval scale. This assumption, however, has not been widely examined. The objective of this study was to assess whether the rating scale (RS), standard gamble (SG), and time trade-off (TTO) utility elicitation methods function as equal-interval level scales. We wrote descriptions of eight prostate-cancer-related health states. In interviews with patients who had newly diagnosed, advanced prostate cancer, utilities for the health states were elicited using the RS, SG, and TTO methods. At the time of the study, 77 initial and 73 follow-up interviews had been conducted with a consecutive sample of 77 participants. Using a Rasch model, the boundaries (Thurstone Thresholds) between four equal score sub-ranges of the raw utilities were mapped onto an equal-interval logit scale. The distance between adjacent thresholds in logit units was calculated to determine whether the raw utilities were equal-interval. None of the utility scales functioned as interval-level scales in our sample. Therefore, since interval-level estimates are assumed in utility-based analyses, doubt is raised regarding the validity of findings from previous analyses based on these scales. Our findings need to be replicated in other contexts, and the practical impact of non-interval measurement on utility-based analyses should be explored. If cost-effectiveness analyses are not found to be robust to violations of the assumption that utilities are interval, serious doubt will be cast upon findings from utility-based analyses and upon the wisdom of expending millions in research dollars on utility-based studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Cook, Karon F. & Ashton, Carol M. & Byrne, Margaret M. & Brody, Baruch & Geraci, Jane & Giesler, R. Brian & Hanita, Makoto & Souchek, Julianne & Wray, Nelda P., 2001. "A psychometric analysis of the measurement level of the rating scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 53(10), pages 1275-1285, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:53:y:2001:i:10:p:1275-1285
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(00)00409-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:eee:socmed:v:53:y:2001:i:10:p:1275-1285. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.