IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v15y1995i3p195-200.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Reluctance to Give Up life in the Measurement of the Values of Health states

Author

Listed:
  • Floyd J. Fowler JR.
  • Paul D. Cleary
  • Michael P. Massagli
  • Joel Weissman
  • Arnold Epstein

Abstract

Questions that involve willingness to risk or give up life often are used to measure the values of health states. In the Boston Health Study, interviews with 291 patients who had AIDS included questions about health status and current desire for resuscitation, and a series of hypothetical questions about desire for life-extending efforts if the patients found themselves in undesirable states, such as being chronically nauseous or blind. An index, "reluctance to give up life" was made from five such questions. The desire for resuscitation was related to current health status, but the general reluctance to give up life was not. Desire to be resus citated was significantly related to current health status only when "reluctance to give up life" was "low." For people reluctant to say they will give up any life at all, questions that involve risking or trading life seem likely to be poor measures of the values of health states. Key words: utility; time tradeoff; standard gamble. (Med Decis Making 1995;15:195-200)

Suggested Citation

  • Floyd J. Fowler JR. & Paul D. Cleary & Michael P. Massagli & Joel Weissman & Arnold Epstein, 1995. "The Role of Reluctance to Give Up life in the Measurement of the Values of Health states," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 15(3), pages 195-200, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:15:y:1995:i:3:p:195-200
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9501500301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X9501500301
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X9501500301?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. D Feeny & G Torrance, 1989. "Incorporating Utility-based Quality-of-life Assessment Measures in Clinical Trials: Two Examples," Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper Series 12, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (CHEPA), McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mandy Ryan & Mabelle Amaya‐Amaya, 2005. "‘Threats’ to and hopes for estimating benefits," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(6), pages 609-619, June.
    2. Trude Arnesen & Mari Trommald, 2005. "Are QALYs based on time trade‐off comparable? – A systematic review of TTO methodologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 39-53, January.
    3. Joel S. Weissman & Jennifer S. Haas & Floyd J. Fowler JR. & Constantine Gatsonis & Michael P. Massagli & George R. Seage & Paul Cleary, 1999. "The Stability of Preferences for Life-sustaining Care among Persons with AIDS in the Boston Health Study," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 19(1), pages 16-26, January.
    4. Eve Wittenberg & Lisa Prosser, 2011. "Ordering errors, objections and invariance in utility survey responses," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 225-241, July.
    5. G. Ardine De Wit & Jan J.V. Busschbach & Frank Th. De Charro, 2000. "Sensitivity and perspective in the valuation of health status: whose values count?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(2), pages 109-126, March.

    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. Claude Le Pen, 1997. "Théorie de l'utilité et mesure des états de santé, le débat QALYs-HYEs," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 129(3), pages 37-54.
    2. Johanna L. Bosch & James K. Hammitt & Milton C. Weinstein & Maria G.M. Hunink, 1998. "Estimating General-population Utilities Using One Binary-gamble Question per Respondent," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 18(4), pages 381-390, October.
    3. Shackley, Phil & Cairns, John, 1996. "Evaluating the benefits of antenatal screening: an alternative approach," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 103-115, May.
    4. Guillem López-Casasnovas & Berta Rivera, 2002. "Las políticas de equidad en salud y las relaciones entre renta y salud," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 161(2), pages 99-126, June.
    5. Johanna L. Bosch & Maria G.M. Hunink, 1996. "The Relationship between Descriptive and Valuational Quality-of-life Measures in Patients with Intermittent Claudication," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 16(3), pages 217-225, August.
    6. Kristina Boye & Louis Matza & Kimberly Walter & Kate Brunt & Andrew Palsgrove & Aodan Tynan, 2011. "Utilities and disutilities for attributes of injectable treatments for type 2 diabetes," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 12(3), pages 219-230, June.
    7. Lyne Lalonde & Ann E. Clarke & Lawrence Joseph & Steven A. Grover, 1999. "Conventional and Chained Standard Gambles in the Assessment of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention and Treatment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 19(2), pages 149-156, April.
    8. Cam Donaldson & Stephen Birch & Amiram Gafni, 2002. "The distribution problem in economic evaluation: income and the valuation of costs and consequences of health care programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(1), pages 55-70, January.
    9. John Cairns & Phil Shackley, 1993. "Sometimes sensitive, seldom specific: A review of the economics of screening," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 2(1), pages 43-53, April.

    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:15:y:1995:i:3:p:195-200. 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.