• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

纸质标准博弈法:一种基于纸质的当前健康标准博弈效用测量方法。

Paper standard gamble: a paper-based measure of standard gamble utility for current health.

作者信息

Ross Phillip L, Littenberg Benjamin, Fearn Paul, Scardino Peter T, Karakiewicz Pierre I, Kattan Michael W

机构信息

Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10021, USA.

出版信息

Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003 Winter;19(1):135-47. doi: 10.1017/s0266462303000138.

DOI:10.1017/s0266462303000138
PMID:12701946
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To develop and validate a paper-based instrument that is simple to administer and produces a reliable estimate of patient standard gamble (SG) utilities for current health status.

METHODS

A 1-page paper questionnaire instrument, paper standard gamble (PSG), was designed to estimate SG utilities. We performed two studies to assess the validity of PSG. First we compared PSG and SG utilities for current health in patients with prostate cancer. They randomly received either PSG followed by SG or vice versa, always with an intervening SF-12. In the second validity study, we assessed the test-retest reliability of PSG by administering it to prostate cancer patients twice, at least 2 weeks apart.

RESULTS

In the first study, utilities were assessed in 64 men (32 per SG/PSG order group). A paired-comparison t test suggested no difference between SG and PSG (mean difference = -0.007; 95% confidence interval (Cl), -0.022 to 0.008). The concordance correlation coefficient was 0.92 (95% Cl, 0.79 to 0.99). In the second study, test and retest PSGs were available for 184 patients. The concordance correlation coefficient was 0.88 (95% Cl, 0.73 to 0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that PSG may serve as a reliable substitute for SG when current health utility is of interest. PSG may have particular advantages for acquisition of health-related quality-of-life data in longitudinal studies.

摘要

目的

开发并验证一种纸质工具,该工具易于实施,能够对患者当前健康状况的标准博弈(SG)效用值进行可靠估计。

方法

设计了一份1页的纸质问卷工具——纸质标准博弈(PSG),用于估计SG效用值。我们进行了两项研究以评估PSG的有效性。首先,我们比较了前列腺癌患者当前健康状况下PSG和SG的效用值。他们随机接受先PSG后SG或先SG后PSG的测试,中间均插入一份SF - 12问卷。在第二项有效性研究中,我们通过对前列腺癌患者至少间隔2周进行两次PSG测试,评估了PSG的重测信度。

结果

在第一项研究中,对64名男性(每个SG/PSG测试顺序组32名)进行了效用值评估。配对比较t检验表明SG和PSG之间无差异(平均差异 = -0.007;95%置信区间(Cl),-0.022至0.008)。一致性相关系数为0.92(95% Cl,0.79至0.99)。在第二项研究中,有184名患者的PSG测试和重测数据。一致性相关系数为0.88(95% Cl,0.73至0.94)。

结论

这些数据表明,当关注当前健康效用时,PSG可作为SG的可靠替代方法。在纵向研究中获取健康相关生活质量数据方面,PSG可能具有特别的优势。

相似文献

1
Paper standard gamble: a paper-based measure of standard gamble utility for current health.纸质标准博弈法:一种基于纸质的当前健康标准博弈效用测量方法。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003 Winter;19(1):135-47. doi: 10.1017/s0266462303000138.
2
Paper Standard Gamble: the reliability of a paper questionnaire to assess utility.纸质标准博弈法:评估效用的纸质问卷的可靠性。
Med Decis Making. 2003 Nov-Dec;23(6):480-8. doi: 10.1177/0272989X03259817.
3
Do visual analogue scale (VAS) derived standard gamble (SG) utilities agree with Health Utilities Index utilities? A comparison of patient and community preferences for health status in rheumatoid arthritis patients.视觉模拟量表(VAS)得出的标准博弈(SG)效用与健康效用指数效用是否一致?类风湿性关节炎患者对健康状况的患者和社区偏好比较。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Apr 20;4:25. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-4-25.
4
Preference-based measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQL) in children with chronic musculoskeletal disorders (MSKDs).基于偏好的慢性肌肉骨骼疾病(MSKDs)患儿健康相关生活质量(HRQL)测量
Med Decis Making. 2003 Jul-Aug;23(4):314-22. doi: 10.1177/0272989X03256008.
5
Marker states and a health state prompt provide modest improvements in the reliability and validity of the standard gamble and rating scale in prostate cancer patients.标记状态和健康状态提示在一定程度上提高了前列腺癌患者标准博弈法和评分量表的信度和效度。
Qual Life Res. 2007 Dec;16(10):1665-75. doi: 10.1007/s11136-007-9264-7. Epub 2007 Oct 3.
6
Patient and community preferences for outcomes in prostate cancer: implications for clinical policy.前列腺癌患者及社区对治疗结果的偏好:对临床政策的影响
Med Care. 2003 Jan;41(1):153-64. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200301000-00017.
7
A psychometric analysis of the measurement level of the rating scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble.对评定量表、时间权衡法和标准博弈法测量水平的心理测量分析。
Soc Sci Med. 2001 Nov;53(10):1275-85. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(00)00409-3.
8
Patient utilities in chronic musculoskeletal pain: how useful is the standard gamble method?慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛患者的效用:标准博弈法有多有用?
Pain. 1999 Mar;80(1-2):365-75. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3959(98)00232-2.
9
Comparing short form 6D, standard gamble, and Health Utilities Index Mark 2 and Mark 3 utility scores: results from total hip arthroplasty patients.比较简式6D、标准博弈法以及健康效用指数2级和3级的效用得分:全髋关节置换术患者的结果
Qual Life Res. 2004 Dec;13(10):1659-70. doi: 10.1007/s11136-004-6189-2.
10
Utilities for prostate cancer health states in men aged 60 and older.
Med Care. 2005 Apr;43(4):347-55. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000156862.33341.45.

引用本文的文献

1
Willingness to accept risk with medication in return for cure of symptoms among patients with Rome IV irritable bowel syndrome.罗马 IV 型肠易激综合征患者为治愈症状愿意接受药物治疗风险。
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2022 May;55(10):1311-1319. doi: 10.1111/apt.16816. Epub 2022 Feb 15.
2
Feasibility of assessing utilities with a single-item standard gamble questionnaire in patients with melanoma.使用单项目标准博弈问卷评估黑色素瘤患者效用值的可行性。
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2021 Aug 28;5(1):78. doi: 10.1186/s41687-021-00350-w.
3
Exclusion Criteria as Measurements I: Identifying Invalid Responses.
排除标准作为测量指标 I:识别无效响应。
Med Decis Making. 2019 Aug;39(6):693-703. doi: 10.1177/0272989X19856617. Epub 2019 Aug 28.
4
Patient preference and decision-making for initiating metastatic colorectal cancer medical treatment.转移性结直肠癌起始医疗的患者偏好与决策
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2016 Mar;142(3):699-706. doi: 10.1007/s00432-015-2073-4. Epub 2015 Nov 18.
5
Quality of life and healthcare use in a randomized controlled lung cancer screening study.一项随机对照肺癌筛查研究中的生活质量和医疗保健利用。
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2013 Aug;10(4):324-9. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201301-007OC.
6
Variations in Physician Attitudes Regarding ADHD and Their Association With Prescribing Practices.医生对注意力缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)态度的差异及其与处方行为的关联。
J Atten Disord. 2015 Jul;19(7):569-77. doi: 10.1177/1087054712461689. Epub 2012 Nov 9.
7
Health-related quality of life anticipated with different management strategies for paediatric febrile neutropaenia.不同儿童发热性中性粒细胞减少症管理策略预期的健康相关生活质量。
Br J Cancer. 2011 Aug 23;105(5):606-11. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2011.213. Epub 2011 Jun 21.
8
Quality of life in patients with various Barrett's esophagus associated health states.患有各种巴雷特食管相关健康状况患者的生活质量。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Aug 2;4:45. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-4-45.
9
Overcoming inherent problems of preference-based techniques for measuring health benefits: an empirical study in the context of kidney transplantation.克服基于偏好的健康效益测量技术的固有问题:肾脏移植背景下的实证研究
BMC Health Serv Res. 2006 Jan 14;6:3. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-6-3.
10
Do medical house officers value the health of veterans differently from the health of non-veterans?住院医生对退伍军人健康的重视程度与对非退伍军人健康的重视程度是否不同?
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004 Apr 7;2:19. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-2-19.