• 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

关于寿命长度和生活质量的主观期望对时间权衡答案的影响。

The influence of subjective expectations about length and quality of life on time trade-off answers.

作者信息

van Nooten Floortje, Brouwer Werner

机构信息

Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Health Econ. 2004 Aug;13(8):819-23. doi: 10.1002/hec.873.

DOI:10.1002/hec.873
PMID:15322993
Abstract

When answering TTO questions respondents sometimes have to imagine being in a certain health state during their remaining lifespan, often based on objective life tables. Respondents however may have subjective expectations about length and quality of life that differ from the objective ones. If respondents do not fully abstract from own expectations, TTO scores may be biased. In this note, we indicate how subjective expectations could influence TTO scores and present some empirical findings suggesting that they do. Our results indicate that subjective expectations may serve as unobserved reference points and as such influence TTO responses.

摘要

在回答时间权衡法(TTO)问题时,受访者有时必须基于客观生命表,设想在其剩余寿命期间处于某种健康状态。然而,受访者可能对生活长度和质量有不同于客观情况的主观期望。如果受访者没有完全抛开自身期望,时间权衡法得分可能会有偏差。在本报告中,我们指出主观期望如何可能影响时间权衡法得分,并给出一些实证研究结果表明它们确实会产生影响。我们的结果表明,主观期望可能作为未被观察到的参考点,进而影响时间权衡法的回答。

相似文献

1
The influence of subjective expectations about length and quality of life on time trade-off answers.关于寿命长度和生活质量的主观期望对时间权衡答案的影响。
Health Econ. 2004 Aug;13(8):819-23. doi: 10.1002/hec.873.
2
The influence of subjective life expectancy on health state valuations using a 10 year TTO.使用10年时间权衡法时主观预期寿命对健康状态估值的影响。
Health Econ. 2009 May;18(5):549-58. doi: 10.1002/hec.1385.
3
Expectations regarding length and health related quality of life: some empirical findings.关于长度和健康相关生活质量的期望:一些实证研究结果。
Soc Sci Med. 2005 Sep;61(5):1083-94. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.01.008. Epub 2005 Mar 3.
4
The correction of TTO-scores for utility curvature using a risk-free utility elicitation method.使用无风险效用诱导方法对用于效用曲率的TTO评分进行校正。
J Health Econ. 2009 Jan;28(1):234-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2008.10.004. Epub 2008 Oct 30.
5
The TTO method and procedural invariance.TTO方法与程序不变性。
Health Econ. 2003 Aug;12(8):655-68. doi: 10.1002/hec.768.
6
Assessing utility values in rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison between time trade-off and the EuroQol.评估类风湿关节炎中的效用值:时间权衡法与欧洲五维度健康量表的比较
Arthritis Rheum. 2006 Oct 15;55(5):751-6. doi: 10.1002/art.22226.
7
Assessing the influence of gestalt-type characteristics on preferences over lifetime health profiles.评估格式塔类型特征对终身健康状况偏好的影响。
Med Decis Making. 2008 Sep-Oct;28(5):723-31. doi: 10.1177/0272989X08315248. Epub 2008 Mar 31.
8
Correcting biases in standard gamble and time tradeoff utilities.纠正标准博弈和时间权衡效用中的偏差。
Med Decis Making. 2004 Sep-Oct;24(5):511-7. doi: 10.1177/0272989X04268955.
9
Do the 15D scores and time trade-off (TTO) values of hospital patients' own health agree?医院患者自评健康的 15D 评分和时间权衡(TTO)值是否一致?
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010 Jan;26(1):117-23. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309990869.
10
Inconsistencies in TTO and VAS values for EQ-5D health states.EQ-5D健康状态的时间权衡法(TTO)和视觉模拟评分法(VAS)值的不一致性。
Med Decis Making. 2006 Mar-Apr;26(2):173-81. doi: 10.1177/0272989X06286480.

引用本文的文献

1
Loss aversion in EQ-5D-Y-3L: does it explain differences in willingness to trade-off life years in adults and children?EQ-5D-Y-3L中的损失厌恶:它能解释成人和儿童在权衡生命年数意愿上的差异吗?
Eur J Health Econ. 2025 Apr 12. doi: 10.1007/s10198-025-01775-6.
2
Preferences for health-related quality of life: do they vary by age? A systematic literature review on the EQ-5D measure.健康相关生活质量的偏好:它们会因年龄而异吗?关于EQ-5D量表的系统文献综述。
Eur J Health Econ. 2025 Mar 25. doi: 10.1007/s10198-025-01766-7.
3
What Makes the Time Tradeoff Tick? A Sociopsychological Explanation.
时间权衡的关键是什么?一种社会心理学解释。
Med Decis Making. 2024 Nov;44(8):974-985. doi: 10.1177/0272989X241286477. Epub 2024 Oct 15.
4
Expect Nothing: The (Lack of) Influence of Subjective Life Expectancy on Valuation of Child Health States.别抱期望:主观预期寿命对儿童健康状态估值的(缺乏)影响
Front Health Serv. 2022 Apr 4;2:803109. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2022.803109. eCollection 2022.
5
Correcting for discounting and loss aversion in composite time trade-off.在复合时间权衡中校正折扣和损失厌恶。
Health Econ. 2022 Aug;31(8):1633-1648. doi: 10.1002/hec.4529. Epub 2022 Apr 26.
6
Determinants of Health Preferences Using Data from the Egyptian EQ-5D-5L Valuation Study.利用埃及 EQ-5D-5L 估值研究的数据确定健康偏好的决定因素。
Patient. 2022 Sep;15(5):589-598. doi: 10.1007/s40271-022-00572-0. Epub 2022 Feb 14.
7
Time trade-off with someone to live for: impact of having significant others on time trade-off valuations of hypothetical health states.与他人进行时间交换以延续生命:重要他人对假想健康状态的时间交换评估的影响。
Qual Life Res. 2022 Apr;31(4):1199-1207. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-03026-6. Epub 2021 Oct 30.
8
A comparison of individual and collective decision making for standard gamble and time trade-off.个体决策与群体决策在标准赌博法和时间权衡法中的比较。
Eur J Health Econ. 2020 Apr;21(3):465-473. doi: 10.1007/s10198-019-01155-x. Epub 2020 Jan 4.
9
QALYs without bias? Nonparametric correction of time trade-off and standard gamble weights based on prospect theory.基于前景理论的时间权衡和标准博弈权重的无偏 QALYs 非参数校正。
Health Econ. 2019 Jul;28(7):843-854. doi: 10.1002/hec.3895.
10
Rabin's paradox for health outcomes.拉宾悖论在健康结果中的体现。
Health Econ. 2019 Aug;28(8):1064-1071. doi: 10.1002/hec.3918. Epub 2019 Jun 19.