IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v18y1998i3p268-277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of the Time-tradeoff Val ues for Prophylactic Mastectomy of Women with a Suspected Genetic Predisposition to Breast Cancer

Author

Listed:
  • Ivana Unic
  • Peep F.M. Stalmeier
  • Lia C.G. Verhoef
  • Willem A.J. Van Daal

Abstract

Background. Female carriers of the breast-cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are at high risk for breast cancer (85%). They face the choice between pro phylactic mastectomy (PM) and breast cancer screening. For this treatment choice, a shared-decision-making program was developed. In this program, the time tradeoff (TTO) was used to assess preferences for PM. Purpose. Assessment of the feasibility, constant proportional tradeoff, and reliability of using the TTO for this purpose. Meth ods. Fifty-four women suspected to carry the BRCA1/2 mutation were provided with comprehensive relevant information. Their preferences for PM were assessed on two occasions. Discrepancies between preferences indicated by the two tests were re solved by testing a third time. The preferences assessed on the last occasion were used for individual decision analyses. In order to test constant proportional tradeoff, the TTO consisted of four items with different numbers of life years. Results. Forty- two women (78%) completed the TTO twice and nine women (17%) performed the test a third time. Three women (5%) completed the TTO only once. The mean TTO value for PM at the last replication was 0.69 (SD = 0.30). Violations of constant pro portional tradeoff were significant: the largest tradeoffs were recorded for the shortest durations. Pearson's correlation coefficient between the TTO values for the two last sessions was 0.96. Conclusion. Assessment of individual preferences by the TTO in this patient group is feasible and reliable. Therefore, the TTO can be used in clinical settings to elicit treatment preferences of women proven or suspected to have a ge netic predisposition to breast cancer. Key words: shared decision making; breast can cer ; prophylactic mastectomy; preference assessment; time tradeoff; genetic predis position. (Med Decis Making 1998;18:268-277)

Suggested Citation

  • Ivana Unic & Peep F.M. Stalmeier & Lia C.G. Verhoef & Willem A.J. Van Daal, 1998. "Assessment of the Time-tradeoff Val ues for Prophylactic Mastectomy of Women with a Suspected Genetic Predisposition to Breast Cancer," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 18(3), pages 268-277, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:18:y:1998:i:3:p:268-277
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9801800303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X9801800303
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X9801800303?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. Han Bleichrodt & Magnus Johannesson, 1997. "The Validity of QALYs," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 17(1), pages 21-32, February.
    2. Joseph S. Pliskin & Donald S. Shepard & Milton C. Weinstein, 1980. "Utility Functions for Life Years and Health Status," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 206-224, February.
    3. Torrance, George W., 1976. "Social preferences for health states: An empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 129-136.
    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. Arne Risa Hole & Richard Norman & Rosalie Viney, 2016. "Response Patterns in Health State Valuation Using Endogenous Attribute Attendance and Latent Class Analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(2), pages 212-224, February.
    2. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F., 2012. "A test of independence of discounting from quality of life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 22-34.
    3. Milton C. Weinstein, 1981. "Economic Assessments of Medical Practices and Technologies," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 1(4), pages 309-330, December.
    4. Arthur Attema & Werner Brouwer, 2012. "The way that you do it? An elaborate test of procedural invariance of TTO, using a choice-based design," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(4), pages 491-500, August.
    5. James Hammitt & Nicolas Treich, 2007. "Statistical vs. identified lives in benefit-cost analysis," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 45-66, August.
    6. Marjon Pol & Larissa Roux, 2005. "Time preference bias in time trade-off," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 6(2), pages 107-111, June.
    7. John Mullahy, 2001. "Live long, live well: quantifying the health of heterogeneous populations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(5), pages 429-440, July.
    8. J. Leighton Read & Robert J. Quinn & Donald M. Berwick & Harvey V. Fineberg & Milton C. Weinstein, 1984. "Preferences for Health Outcomes," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 4(3), pages 315-329, August.
    9. Bleichrodt, Han & Pinto, Jose Luis & Maria Abellan-Perpinan, Jose, 2003. "A consistency test of the time trade-off," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 1037-1052, November.
    10. Ryan Edwards, 2013. "The cost of uncertain life span," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(4), pages 1485-1522, October.
    11. Heather J. Sutherland & Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas & Norman F. Boyd & James E. Till, 1982. "Attitudes Toward Quality of Survival," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 2(3), pages 299-309, August.
    12. Rosalie Viney & Elizabeth Savage, 2006. "Health care policy evaluation: empirical analysis of the restrictions implied by Quality Adjusted Life Years, CHERE Working Paper 2006/10," Working Papers 2006/10, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
    13. Rosalie Viney & Richard Norman & John Brazier & Paula Cronin & Madeleine T. King & Julie Ratcliffe & Deborah Street, 2014. "An Australian Discrete Choice Experiment To Value Eq‐5d Health States," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(6), pages 729-742, June.
    14. Bleichrodt, Han & Quiggin, John, 1999. "Life-cycle preferences over consumption and health: when is cost-effectiveness analysis equivalent to cost-benefit analysis?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 681-708, December.
    15. José‐María Abellán‐Perpiñán & José‐Luis Pinto‐Prades & Ildefonso Méndez‐Martínez & Xabier Badía‐Llach, 2006. "Towards a better QALY model," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(7), pages 665-676, July.
    16. Peter E. Krumins & Stephan D. Fihn & Daniel L. Kent, 1988. "Symptom Severity and Patients' Values in the Decision to Perform a Transurethral Resection of the Prostate," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, February.
    17. F. Reed Johnson & John J. Sheehan & Semra Ozdemir & Matthew Wallace & Jui-Chen Yang, 2025. "How Much Better is Faster? Empirical Tests of QALY Assumptions in Health-Outcome Sequences," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 45-52, January.
    18. Bengt Liljas, 2011. "Welfare, QALYs, and costs – a comment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 68-72, January.
    19. 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.
    20. McNamara, Simon & Tsuchiya, Aki & Holmes, John, 2021. "Does the UK-public's aversion to inequalities in health differ by group-labelling and health-gain type? A choice-experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 269(C).

    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:18:y:1998:i:3:p:268-277. 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.