• 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

不断证明相反的观点?使用广阔的时间范围和贴现修正来检验 CPTO。

Constantly proving the opposite? A test of CPTO using a broad time horizon and correcting for discounting.

机构信息

iBMG/iMTA, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Qual Life Res. 2012 Feb;21(1):25-34. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9917-4. Epub 2011 Apr 21.

DOI:10.1007/s11136-011-9917-4
PMID:21505879
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3254865/
Abstract

PURPOSE

An important assumption underlying the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) model is that people trade off life years against health in the same proportion irrespective of the number of remaining life years. This is known as the constant proportional trade-offs (CPTO) condition. Previous studies have produced mixed empirical evidence about the validity of CPTO. This paper is the first to test CPTO using the time trade-off (TTO) method for a broad time horizon.

METHODS

In a sample of 83 students, we use a choice based TTO protocol to elicit TTO scores for back pain, using ten different gauge durations ranging between 1 and 46 years. The TTO scores are corrected for discounting, which is elicited by means of the direct method.

RESULTS

We find average TTO scores varying between 0.72 and 0.81. Although the scores do not differ much for different durations in absolute terms, some differences are significant, rejecting CPTO, with and without correcting for discounting. No clear relationship between TTO scores and gauge duration is found. An anchoring and rounding heuristic to some extent explains our results.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the importance of elicitation methods and context dependencies in QALY measurement and warrant detailed investigation of their influence.

摘要

目的

质量调整生命年(QALY)模型的一个重要假设是,无论剩余生命年限如何,人们都会以相同的比例权衡生命年和健康。这被称为恒定比例权衡(CPTO)条件。先前的研究对 CPTO 的有效性产生了混合的经验证据。本文首次使用广泛的时间范围的时间权衡(TTO)方法来测试 CPTO。

方法

在 83 名学生的样本中,我们使用基于选择的 TTO 协议来引出背痛的 TTO 分数,使用十种不同的量表持续时间在 1 到 46 年之间。TTO 分数经过贴现校正,通过直接法引出。

结果

我们发现平均 TTO 分数在 0.72 到 0.81 之间变化。尽管在绝对值上不同持续时间的分数差异不大,但一些差异具有统计学意义,拒绝了 CPTO,无论是校正还是未校正贴现。没有发现 TTO 分数和量表持续时间之间有明显的关系。一种锚定和舍入启发式在一定程度上解释了我们的结果。

结论

我们的发现强调了在 QALY 测量中,启发式和语境依赖的重要性,需要对其影响进行详细调查。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bed/3254865/e073c2694e3e/11136_2011_9917_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bed/3254865/e9e046f06a82/11136_2011_9917_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bed/3254865/720a3437922d/11136_2011_9917_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bed/3254865/4bc5f9871da8/11136_2011_9917_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bed/3254865/71e7d9198d39/11136_2011_9917_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bed/3254865/e073c2694e3e/11136_2011_9917_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bed/3254865/e9e046f06a82/11136_2011_9917_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bed/3254865/720a3437922d/11136_2011_9917_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bed/3254865/4bc5f9871da8/11136_2011_9917_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bed/3254865/71e7d9198d39/11136_2011_9917_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bed/3254865/e073c2694e3e/11136_2011_9917_Fig5_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Constantly proving the opposite? A test of CPTO using a broad time horizon and correcting for discounting.不断证明相反的观点?使用广阔的时间范围和贴现修正来检验 CPTO。
Qual Life Res. 2012 Feb;21(1):25-34. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9917-4. Epub 2011 Apr 21.
2
On the (not so) constant proportional trade-off in TTO.TTO 中的(并非那么)恒定比例权衡。
Qual Life Res. 2010 May;19(4):489-97. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9605-9. Epub 2010 Feb 12.
3
Lead time TTO: leading to better health state valuations?等待时间 TTO:是否会导致更好的健康状态估值?
Health Econ. 2013 Apr;22(4):376-92. doi: 10.1002/hec.2804. Epub 2012 Mar 6.
4
The value of correcting values: influence and importance of correcting TTO scores for time preference.校正价值观的价值:校正时间偏好 TTO 评分的影响和重要性。
Value Health. 2010 Dec;13(8):879-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00773.x.
5
The way that you do it? An elaborate test of procedural invariance of TTO, using a choice-based design.你是怎么做的?采用基于选择的设计,对 TTO 的程序不变性进行了精心测试。
Eur J Health Econ. 2012 Aug;13(4):491-500. doi: 10.1007/s10198-011-0318-y. Epub 2011 May 15.
6
Deriving time discounting correction factors for TTO tariffs.推导 TTO 关税的时间贴现修正系数。
Health Econ. 2014 Apr;23(4):410-25. doi: 10.1002/hec.2921. Epub 2013 Apr 7.
7
Time preference bias in time trade-off.时间权衡中的时间偏好偏差。
Eur J Health Econ. 2005 Jun;6(2):107-11. doi: 10.1007/s10198-004-0265-y.
8
Derivation of a UK preference-based value set for the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (SWEMWBS) to allow estimation of Mental Well-being Adjusted Life Years (MWALYs).为了能够估算心理健康调整生命年(MWALYs),从英国短版华威-爱丁堡心理健康量表(SWEMWBS)中推导出一个基于偏好的价值体系。
Soc Sci Med. 2023 Jun;327:115928. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.115928. Epub 2023 Apr 29.
9
A comparison of methods for converting DCE values onto the full health-dead QALY scale.将DCE值转换到完整的健康-死亡质量调整生命年量表的方法比较。
Med Decis Making. 2015 Apr;35(3):328-40. doi: 10.1177/0272989X14559542. Epub 2014 Nov 14.
10
Preferences for improvements in attributes associated with basal insulin: a time trade-off and willingness-to-pay survey of a diabetic and non-diabetic population in Sweden.对基础胰岛素相关属性改善的偏好:瑞典糖尿病和非糖尿病患者群体的时间权衡与支付意愿调查
J Med Econ. 2016 Oct;19(10):945-58. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2016.1187152. Epub 2016 May 31.

引用本文的文献

1
The effect of duration and time preference on the gap between adult and child health state valuations in time trade-off.时间偏好和持续时间对时间权衡中成人和儿童健康状态估值差距的影响。
Eur J Health Econ. 2024 Jun;25(4):601-613. doi: 10.1007/s10198-023-01612-8. Epub 2023 Jul 8.
2
Correction to: Time and lexicographic preferences in the valuation of EQ-5D-Y with time trade-off methodology.对《采用时间权衡法评估EQ-5D-Y时的时间和词典排序偏好》的更正
Eur J Health Econ. 2022 Dec;23(9):1613-1615. doi: 10.1007/s10198-022-01530-1. Epub 2022 Oct 5.
3
Time and lexicographic preferences in the valuation of EQ-5D-Y with time trade-off methodology.

本文引用的文献

1
Does mode of administration matter? Comparison of online and face-to-face administration of a time trade-off task.管理模式重要吗?时间权衡任务的线上和面对面管理比较。
Qual Life Res. 2010 May;19(4):499-508. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9609-5. Epub 2010 Feb 22.
2
On the (not so) constant proportional trade-off in TTO.TTO 中的(并非那么)恒定比例权衡。
Qual Life Res. 2010 May;19(4):489-97. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9605-9. Epub 2010 Feb 12.
3
Time preference bias in time trade-off.时间权衡中的时间偏好偏差。
时间权衡法评估 EQ-5D-Y 时的时间和词典偏好。
Eur J Health Econ. 2023 Mar;24(2):293-305. doi: 10.1007/s10198-022-01466-6. Epub 2022 May 21.
4
Time trade-off: one methodology, different methods.时间权衡:一种方法,多种方法。
Eur J Health Econ. 2013 Jul;14 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S53-64. doi: 10.1007/s10198-013-0508-x.
5
The way that you do it? An elaborate test of procedural invariance of TTO, using a choice-based design.你是怎么做的?采用基于选择的设计,对 TTO 的程序不变性进行了精心测试。
Eur J Health Econ. 2012 Aug;13(4):491-500. doi: 10.1007/s10198-011-0318-y. Epub 2011 May 15.
Eur J Health Econ. 2005 Jun;6(2):107-11. doi: 10.1007/s10198-004-0265-y.
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
A comparison of individual and social time trade-off values for health states in the general population.普通人群中健康状态的个体和社会时间权衡价值比较。
Health Policy. 2006 May;76(3):359-70. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2005.06.011. Epub 2005 Oct 7.
6
The QALY model and individual preferences for health states and health profiles over time: a systematic review of the literature.质量调整生命年模型以及随时间推移个体对健康状态和健康状况的偏好:文献系统综述
Med Decis Making. 2005 Jul-Aug;25(4):460-7. doi: 10.1177/0272989X05276854.
7
Are QALYs based on time trade-off comparable?--A systematic review of TTO methodologies.基于时间权衡的质量调整生命年是否具有可比性?——对时间权衡方法的系统评价
Health Econ. 2005 Jan;14(1):39-53. doi: 10.1002/hec.895.
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
A consistency test of the time trade-off.时间权衡的一致性测试。
J Health Econ. 2003 Nov;22(6):1037-52. doi: 10.1016/s0167-6296(03)00046-8.
10
The validity of time trade-off values in calculating QALYs: constant proportional time trade-off versus the proportional heuristic.时间权衡值在计算质量调整生命年(QALYs)中的有效性:恒定比例时间权衡与比例启发法
J Health Econ. 2003 May;22(3):445-58. doi: 10.1016/S0167-6296(02)00120-0.