Author
Listed:
- Philip Kinghorn
- Alastair Canaway
- Cara Bailey
- Hareth Al-Janabi
- Joanna Coast
Abstract
Aim: Explore the use of deliberative valuation to elicit relative weights for a set of capabilities identified as being important and relevant to those close to patients receiving supportive care at the end of life. Methods: Focus groups, involving the general UK population (n = 38) and policy-makers (n = 29) with experience of, and influence on, priorities for end of life care. Public participants completed two valuation tasks (budget pie and visual analogue scale (VAS)) individually, discussed their responses, and then recorded a final (individual) response. Policy-makers completed the VAS tasks in a separate series of focus groups. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of participants’ responses are reported. Results: Individual values were aggregated to form relative weights for the capabilities. Capabilities given greatest weighting were “good communication between care providers and close persons” and “practical support for close persons”. The quantitative impact of deliberation on weights overall was negligible, but qualitative findings indicated that disclosure of personal experiences did appear to prompt others to consider issues from new perspectives. Discussion: Deliberative valuation was found to be a potentially feasible method for generating weights. However, further consideration needs to be given as to how to optimise recruitment whilst ensuring that participants actively engage with the task.
Suggested Citation
Philip Kinghorn & Alastair Canaway & Cara Bailey & Hareth Al-Janabi & Joanna Coast, 2022.
"A Deliberative Approach to Valuing Capabilities: Assessing and Valuing Changes in the Well-Being of those Close to Patients Receiving Supportive End of Life Care,"
Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 455-476, July.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:jhudca:v:23:y:2022:i:3:p:455-476
DOI: 10.1080/19452829.2021.2008885
Download full text from publisher
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:taf:jhudca:v:23:y:2022:i:3:p:455-476. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJHD20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.