Development of a new preference-based instrument to measure dependency
This paper reports the estimation of a preference-based scoring algorithm for a new dependency health state classification system. According to this system health states are described as a combination of 6 attributes (eat, incontinence, personal care, mobility, housework and cognition/mental problems), with 3 or 4 levels each. The tariff of this instrument is based on community preferences, hence it is consistent with the so-called ‘societal perspective’. Preference weights can be used in QALY calculations and cost-utility analysis.
|Date of creation:||Nov 2013|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Campus de Lagoas Marcosende, s/n, 36200 VIGO|
Phone: 986 - 812500
Fax: 986 - 812401
Web page: http://webx06.webs.uvigo.es/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- 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.
- 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.
- José-Luis Pinto-Prades & José-María Abellán-Perpiñán, 2005.
"Measuring the health of populations: the veil of ignorance approach,"
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 69-82.
- José-Luis Pinto-Prades & José-María Abellán-Perpiñán, 2004. "Mesuring the Health of Populations: The Veil of Ignorance Approach," Working Papers 116, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
- Ryan, Mandy & Netten, Ann & Skatun, Diane & Smith, Paul, 2006. "Using discrete choice experiments to estimate a preference-based measure of outcome--An application to social care for older people," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 927-944, September.
- Abellan-Perpiñan, Jose Maria & Bleichrodt, Han & Pinto-Prades, Jose Luis, 2009. "The predictive validity of prospect theory versus expected utility in health utility measurement," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 1039-1047, December.
- Dolan, Paul & Kind, Paul, 1996. "Inconsistency and health state valuations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 609-615, February.
- Burge, Peter & Netten, Ann & Gallo, Federico, 2010. "Estimating the value of social care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 883-894, December.
- Beattie, Jane, et al, 1998. "On the Contingent Valuation of Safety and the Safety of Contingent Valuation: Part 1--Caveat Investigator," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 5-25, October.
- 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.
- Drummond, Michael F. & Sculpher, Mark J. & Torrance, George W. & O'Brien, Bernie J. & Stoddart, Greg L., 2005. "Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 3, number 9780198529453, December.
- Badia, Xavier & Roset, Monserrat & Herdman, Michael, 1999. "Inconsistent responses in three preference-elicitation methods for health states," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(7), pages 943-950, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vig:wpaper:1301. 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: (Patricia González Piñeiro)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.