Dolan Paul, Stalmeier Peep
Department of Economics, Sheffield Health Economics Group, University of Sheffield, 30 Regene Street, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK.
J Health Econ. 2003 May;22(3):445-58. doi: 10.1016/S0167-6296(02)00120-0.
In order to calculate quality adjusted life years (QALYs) from time trade-off (TTO) responses, individual preferences are required to satisfy the constant proportional time trade-off (CPTTO) assumption. Respondents who use a simple proportional heuristic may appear to satisfy CPTTO but will in fact generate preference reversals for states that are associated with a maximal endurable time (MET). Using data from 91 respondents, the study reported here examines the extent to which valuations satisfy the CPTTO assumption and the extent to which they might be generated by the proportional heuristic. The results suggest that respondents are using a proportional heuristic that casts doubt on the validity of using the TTO method to calculate QALYs for health states that are associated with MET preferences.
为了根据时间权衡(TTO)反应计算质量调整生命年(QALY),个人偏好需要满足恒定比例时间权衡(CPTTO)假设。使用简单比例启发法的受访者可能看似满足CPTTO,但实际上会对与最大可耐受时间(MET)相关的状态产生偏好逆转。本文报告的研究使用91名受访者的数据,考察了估值在多大程度上满足CPTTO假设,以及它们在多大程度上可能由比例启发法产生。结果表明,受访者正在使用一种比例启发法,这对使用TTO方法为与MET偏好相关的健康状态计算QALY的有效性提出了质疑。