IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hpa/wpaper/199009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Guide to Design and Development of Health-State Utility Instrumentation

Author

Listed:
  • William Furlong

    (Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University)

  • David Feeny

    (Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Department of Economics, Centre for Health Economics & Policy Analysis, McMaster University)

  • George Torrance

    (Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Department of Business, Centre for Health Economics & Policy Analysis, McMaster University)

  • Ronald Barr

    (Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University)

  • John Horsman

    (Department of Medicine, McMaster University)

Abstract

Growing interest in methods of quantifying health-related quality of life has resulted in demand for a manual describing general techniques that may be customized by health researchers and used to measure preferences in applications having a wide variety of objectives. This report is intended to provide practice guidelines to researchers who require information about the design, construction and administration of instruments used to obtain estimates of health utility. The focus is on the steps required to conduct a study in which preferences are measured; the theory that underlies utility measurement is not presented. Utility scores may be used to assess the health-related quality of life for specific health states. Utility scores are also useful in evaluations, such as cost-utility analyses, in which the costs of health care interventions are compared to their consequences both in terms of quantity and quality of life. In order to obtain reliable, valid, and responsive utility scores, however, the instruments must be carefully designed, tested and executed. Experience to date indicates that careful instrument development requires time, effort and care. Three major instruments are described: rating scale, standard gamble and time trade-off. Methodologically correct techniques are recommended where possible and suggestions, based on experience, are presented for situation in which theoretical or empirical evidence is lacking. The guide discusses the criteria for selection of techniques, materials, interviewers and respondents. Examples of an interviewer training manual, interview scripts and data recording forms are also included. Detailed diagrams provide specifications for assembling visual aids (i.e., interviewing props) and an extensive bibliography will direct readers interested in specific issues to appropriate references.

Suggested Citation

  • William Furlong & David Feeny & George Torrance & Ronald Barr & John Horsman, 1992. "Guide to Design and Development of Health-State Utility Instrumentation," Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper Series 1990-09, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (CHEPA), McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
  • Handle: RePEc:hpa:wpaper:199009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.chepa.org/Files/Working%20Papers/wp90-9.pdf
    File Function: First version, 1990
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jane Hall & Richard De Abreu Lourenco & Rosalie Viney, 1999. "Carrots and sticks-the fall and fall of private health insurance in Australia," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(8), pages 653-660.
    2. Vaithianathan, Rhema, 2002. "Will Subsidising Private Health Insurance Help the Public Health System?," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 78(242), pages 277-283, September.
    3. Amir Shmueli, 2001. "The effect of health on acute care supplemental insurance ownership: an empirical analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 341-350.
    4. Besley, Timothy & Hall, John & Preston, Ian, 1999. "The demand for private health insurance: do waiting lists matter?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 155-181, May.
    5. Cutler, David M. & Zeckhauser, Richard J., 2000. "The anatomy of health insurance," Handbook of Health Economics,in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 563-643 Elsevier.
    6. Chiu, W. Henry, 1997. "Health insurance and the welfare of health care consumers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 125-133, April.
    7. Besley, Timothy & Coate, Stephen, 1991. "Public Provision of Private Goods and the Redistribution of Income," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 979-984, September.
    8. Jonathan Gruber, 2000. "Tax Subsidies for Health Insurance: Evaluating the Costs and Benefits," NBER Working Papers 7553, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Garry F. Barrett & Robert Conlon, 2003. "Adverse Selection and the Decline in Private Health Insurance Coverage in Australia: 1989-95," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 79(246), pages 279-296, September.
    10. Mark Stabile, 2001. "Private insurance subsidies and public health care markets: evidence from Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(4), pages 921-942, November.
    11. Propper, Carol, 2000. "The demand for private health care in the UK," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 855-876, November.
    12. Jack, William, 1998. "Intergenerational Risk Sharing and Health Insurance Financing," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 74(225), pages 153-161, June.
    13. Jeremiah Hurley, 2001. "Ethics, Economics, and Public Financing of Health Care," Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper Series 2001-07, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (CHEPA), McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
    14. Ettner, Susan L., 1997. "Adverse selection and the purchase of Medigap insurance by the elderly," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 543-562, October.
    15. Carol Propper & Alan Maynard, 1989. "The market for private health care and the demand for private insurance in Britain," Working Papers 053chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    16. Rhema Vaithianathan, 2001. "An Economic Analysis of the Private Health Insurance Incentive Act (1998)," CEPR Discussion Papers 427, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Economics, Australian National University.
    17. Evans, R.G., 2000. "Financing Health Care: Taxation and the Alternatives," Centre for Health Services and Policy Research 2000:15d, University of British Columbia - Centre for Health Services and Policy Research..
    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. Brazier, John & Roberts, Jennifer & Deverill, Mark, 2002. "The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 271-292, March.
    2. Andrew Lloyd & Scott Doyle & Sarah Dewilde & Florian Turk, 2008. "Preferences and utilities for the symptoms of moderate to severe allergic asthma," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(3), pages 275-284, August.
    3. 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.
    4. Brazier, J, 2005. "Current state of the art in preference-based measures of health and avenues for further research," MPRA Paper 29762, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Katherine J. Stevens & Christopher J. McCabe & John E. Brazier, 2006. "Mapping between Visual Analogue Scale and Standard Gamble data; results from the UK Health Utilities Index 2 valuation survey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 527-533.
    6. Alan Shiell & Janelle Seymour & Penelope Hawe & Sue Cameron, 2000. "Are preferences over health states complete?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(1), pages 47-55.
    7. Valerie Seror, 2008. "Fitting observed and theoretical choices - women's choices about prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 557-577.
    8. McCabe, Christopher & Brazier, John & Gilks, Peter & Tsuchiya, Aki & Roberts, Jennifer & O'Hagan, Anthony & Stevens, Katherine, 2006. "Using rank data to estimate health state utility models," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 418-431, May.
    9. Christopher McCabe & Katherine Stevens & Jennifer Roberts & John Brazier, 2005. "Health state values for the HUI 2 descriptive system: results from a UK survey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 231-244.
    10. McCabe, C & Brazier, J & Gilks, P & Tsuchiya, A & Roberts, J & O'Hagan, A & Stevens, K, 2004. "Estimating population cardinal health state valuation models from individual ordinal (rank) health state preference data," MPRA Paper 29759, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Paul McNamee & Sharon Glendinning & Jonathan Shenfine & Nick Steen & S. Griffin & John Bond, 2004. "Chained time trade-off and standard gamble methods," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 5(1), pages 81-86, February.
    12. Zafar Hakim & Dev S. Pathak, 1999. "Modelling the EuroQol data: a comparison of discrete choice conjoint and conditional preference modelling," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(2), pages 103-116.
    13. Brazier, J & Dolan, P, 2005. "Evidence of preference construction in a comparison of variants of the standard gamble method," MPRA Paper 29760, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Arthur Attema & Yvette Edelaar-Peeters & Matthijs Versteegh & Elly Stolk, 2013. "Time trade-off: one methodology, different methods," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(1), pages 53-64, July.

    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:hpa:wpaper:199009. 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: (Lyn Sauberli). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/chepaca.html .

    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 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.

    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.