IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v8y1999i1p41-51.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A checklist for judging preference-based measures of health related quality of life: Learning from psychometrics

Author

Listed:
  • John Brazier

    (University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK)

  • Mark Deverill

    (University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK)

Abstract

There have been a number of published reviews of measures of health related quality of life, but most of this work has been undertaken within a tradition of psychometrics outside of economics. This situation has often resulted in health status measures designed specifically for the purposes of economic evaluation being neglected and portrayed as 'invalid'. This paper utilizes and adapts the traditional psychometric concepts of practicality, reliability and validity for judging preference-based measures of health related quality of life. The psychometric and economic approaches are most different in relation to validity because they are seeking to measure different concepts. The former seeks to measure health change as perceived by patients, whilst economic evaluation requires a measure of the value or strength of preference for the health change. A checklist is presented to provide guidance in the design or review of economic evaluations using changes in health as the main measure of benefit.Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • John Brazier & Mark Deverill, 1999. "A checklist for judging preference-based measures of health related quality of life: Learning from psychometrics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 41-51.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:8:y:1999:i:1:p:41-51
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199902)8:1<41::AID-HEC395>3.0.CO;2-#
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan Williams, 1995. "The role of the Euroqol instrument in QALY calculations," Working Papers 130chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    2. Richardson, J., 1994. "Cost utility analysis: What should be measured?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 7-21, July.
    3. Culyer, A J, 1971. "The Nature of the Commodity 'Health Care' and Its Efficient Allocation," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 189-211, July.
    4. Torrance, George W., 1986. "Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal : A review," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 1-30, March.
    5. Dolan, P. & Gudex, C. & Kind, P. & Williams, A., 1996. "Valuing health states: A comparison of methods," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 209-231, April.
    6. Buckingham, Ken, 1993. "A note on HYE (healthy years equivalent)," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 301-309, October.
    7. Gafni, Amiram & Birch, Stephen, 1995. "Preferences for outcomes in economic evaluation: An economic approach to addressing economic problems," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 767-776, March.
    8. Loomes, Graham, 1995. "The myth of the HYE," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 1-7, May.
    9. Gafni, Amiram & Birch, Stephen, 1993. "Searching for a common currency: Critical appraisal of the scientific basis underlying European harmonization of the measurement of health related quality of life (EuroQol(c))," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 219-228, March.
    10. Donaldson, Cam & Atkinson, Ann & Bond, John & Wright, Ken, 1988. "Should QALYs be programme-specific?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 239-257, September.
    11. Hall, Jane & Gerard, Karen & Salkeld, Glenn & Richardson, Jeff, 1992. "A cost utility analysis of mammography screening in Australia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 993-1004, May.
    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. Yaling Yang & John Brazier & Louise Longworth, 2015. "EQ-5D in skin conditions: an assessment of validity and responsiveness," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(9), pages 927-939, December.
    2. R.M.P.M. Baltussen & M. Sanon & J. Sommerfeld & R. Würthwein, 2002. "Obtaining disability weights in rural Burkina Faso using a culturally adapted visual analogue scale," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(2), pages 155-163.
    3. Rodríguez-Míguez, E. & Abellán-Perpiñán, J.M. & Alvarez, X.C. & González, X.M. & Sampayo, A.R., 2016. "The DEP-6D, a new preference-based measure to assess health states of dependency," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 210-219.
    4. Michaël Schwarzinger & Jean-Louis Lanoë & Erik Nord & Isabelle Durand-Zaleski, 2004. "Lack of multiplicative transitivity in person trade-off responses," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(2), pages 171-181.
    5. Garry R. Barton & Tracey H. Sach & Anthony J. Avery & Claire Jenkinson & Michael Doherty & David K. Whynes & Kenneth R. Muir, 2008. "A comparison of the performance of the EQ-5D and SF-6D for individuals aged > 45 years," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(7), pages 815-832.
    6. 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.
    7. Stavros Petrou, 2003. "Methodological issues raised by preference-based approaches to measuring the health status of children," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(8), pages 697-702.
    8. John Brazier & Jennifer Roberts & Aki Tsuchiya & Jan Busschbach, 2004. "A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(9), pages 873-884.
    9. Tsuchiya, Aki & Brazier, John & Roberts, Jennifer, 2006. "Comparison of valuation methods used to generate the EQ-5D and the SF-6D value sets," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 334-346, March.
    10. San Miguel, Fernando & Ryan, Mandy & Scott, Anthony, 2002. "Are preferences stable? The case of health care," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 1-14, May.
    11. Janelle Seymour & Paul McNamee & Anthony Scott & Michela Tinelli, 2010. "Shedding new light onto the ceiling and floor? A quantile regression approach to compare EQ-5D and SF-6D responses," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(6), pages 683-696.
    12. Jack Dowie, 2002. "Decision validity should determine whether a generic or condition-specific HRQOL measure is used in health care decisions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(1), pages 1-8.
    13. Karen Gerard & Katharine Johnston & Jackie Brown, 1999. "The role of a pre-scored multi-attribute health classification measure in validating condition-specific health state descriptions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(8), pages 685-699.
    14. Marra, Carlo A. & Woolcott, John C. & Kopec, Jacek A. & Shojania, Kamran & Offer, Robert & Brazier, John E. & Esdaile, John M. & Anis, Aslam H., 2005. "A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(7), pages 1571-1582, April.
    15. D. Stratmann-Schoene & T. Kuehn & R. Kreienberg & R. Leidl, 2006. "A preference-based index for the SF-12," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 553-564.
    16. Catherine Le Galès & Catherine Buron & Nathalie Costet & Sophia Rosman & Gérard Slama, 2001. "Développement d'un index d'états de santé pondéré par les utilités en population française : le Health Utilities Index," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 150(4), pages 71-87.
    17. Stavros Petrou & Christine Hockley, 2005. "An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(11), pages 1169-1189.
    18. Richard Edlin & Christopher McCabe & David Meads, 2013. "Assignment errors and the valuation of EQ-5D health states-do responses mean what we think they mean?," Working Papers 1304, Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:hlthec:v:8:y:1999:i:1:p:41-51. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.