• 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

Health status utility assessment by standard gamble: a comparison of the probability equivalence and the lottery equivalence approaches.

作者信息

Law A V, Pathak D S, McCord M R

机构信息

Division of Pharmacy Practice and Administration, College of Pharmacy, Ohio State University, Columbus 43210, USA.

出版信息

Pharm Res. 1998 Jan;15(1):105-9. doi: 10.1023/a:1011913123135.

DOI:10.1023/a:1011913123135
PMID:9487555
Abstract

PURPOSE

Utility values obtained with the standard gamble (SG) method using the probability equivalence approach (PE) have a reported bias due to the "certainty effect." This effect causes individuals to overvalue a positive outcome when it occurs under certainty. Researchers in the decision sciences have proposed an alternative, "lottery equivalence" (LE) approach, using paired gambles, to eliminate this bias. The major objective of the current study was to investigate the certainty effect in health status utility measures and to test our hypothesis that the certainty effect would act in a reverse direction for negatively valued outcomes.

METHODS

Fifty-four subjects completed the study by assessing preferences for three health states by rating scale and then by SG using PE as well as LE approaches with assessment lotteries of 0.5 and 0.75.

RESULTS

The results from 41 useable responses point towards possible existence of the certainty effect in health in the hypothesized direction: utility values obtained with the PE were significantly lower than with the LEs. There was no significant difference between the LE values indicating elimination of the bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The results have important implications since the SG using PE is thought be the "gold standard" in health status utility measurements.

摘要

相似文献

1
Health status utility assessment by standard gamble: a comparison of the probability equivalence and the lottery equivalence approaches.
Pharm Res. 1998 Jan;15(1):105-9. doi: 10.1023/a:1011913123135.
2
Eliciting Health State Utilities Using Paired-Gamble Methods: The Role of the Starting Point.采用配对博弈法评估健康状态效用值:起点的作用。
Value Health. 2019 Apr;22(4):446-452. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.01.007. Epub 2019 Mar 15.
3
Do Probability and Certainty Equivalent Techniques Lead to Inconsistent Results? Evidence from Gambles Involving Life-Years and Quality of Life.概率与确定性等价技术会导致不一致的结果吗?来自涉及生命年限和生活质量的赌博的证据。
Value Health. 2015 Jun;18(4):413-24. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.12.019. Epub 2015 Apr 15.
4
Health utility bias: a systematic review and meta-analytic evaluation.健康效用偏倚:系统评价和荟萃分析评估。
Med Decis Making. 2010 Jan-Feb;30(1):58-67. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07312478. Epub 2008 Jun 12.
5
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.
6
Testing the internal consistency of the lottery equivalents method using health outcomes.使用健康结果测试彩票等效法的内部一致性。
Health Econ. 2005 Feb;14(2):149-59. doi: 10.1002/hec.889.
7
Comparing directly measured standard gamble scores to HUI2 and HUI3 utility scores: group- and individual-level comparisons.将直接测量的标准博弈分数与健康效用指数2(HUI2)和健康效用指数3(HUI3)效用分数进行比较:组水平和个体水平比较。
Soc Sci Med. 2004 Feb;58(4):799-809. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(03)00254-5.
8
Patient utilities in fibromyalgia and the association with other outcome measures.纤维肌痛患者的效用及其与其他结局指标的关联。
J Rheumatol. 1995 Aug;22(8):1536-43.
9
Comparison of Health State Utility Measures in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer.头颈癌患者健康状态效用测量的比较
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015 Aug;141(8):696-703. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2015.1314.
10
A framework for estimating health state utility values within a discrete choice experiment: modeling risky choices.离散选择实验中估计健康状态效用值的框架:对风险选择进行建模
Med Decis Making. 2015 Apr;35(3):341-50. doi: 10.1177/0272989X14554715. Epub 2014 Oct 27.

引用本文的文献

1
Utilities measured by rating scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble: review and reference for health care professionals.通过评定量表、时间权衡法和标准博弈法测量的效用:给医疗保健专业人员的综述与参考
J Epidemiol. 2002 Mar;12(2):160-78. doi: 10.2188/jea.12.160.

本文引用的文献

1
Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal.用于经济评估的健康状态效用测量。
J Health Econ. 1986 Mar;5(1):1-30. doi: 10.1016/0167-6296(86)90020-2.
2
Risk attitude in gambles with years of life: empirical support for prospect theory.涉及寿命年限的赌博中的风险态度:对前景理论的实证支持。
Med Decis Making. 1994 Apr-Jun;14(2):194-200. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9401400213.
3
Measuring patient preferences: rating scale versus standard gamble.测量患者偏好:评分量表与标准博弈法
Med Decis Making. 1995 Jul-Sep;15(3):283-5. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9501500311.
4
Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life.测量健康相关生活质量的效用方法。
J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(6):593-603. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90019-1.
5
The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public.公众所感知的不同健康状态的效用。
J Chronic Dis. 1978;31(11):697-704. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(78)90072-3.