Abstract
Comparison of scaling methods used to value health states sometimes rests upon an examination of aggregate scores. This analysis is usually undertaken once “inconsistent” respondents have been excluded from the data. However, it is important to have information on the extent to which respondents are logically consistent when valuing health states. The degree of inconsistency will depend on how the health states are described, how the questionnaire is administered and who the respondents are. This paper analyses the inconsistency rates from two studies in which valuations for EuroQol health states were elicited using a visual analogue scale. The studies differed in design and incorporated several different variants of the standard EuroQol questionnaire, thus providing an opportunity to examine the relative importance of the different factors that were thought to affect inconsistency rates. Our general conclusions are that inconsistency rates are higher for postal than for interviewer-based surveys, possibly due to response bias, and that inconsistency rates are positively related to age and negatively related to educational attainment.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Boyd N F, Sutherland N J, Ciampi A, Tibshirani R, Till J E, Harwood A. A comparison of methods of assessing voice quality in laryngeal cancer. In: Choices in health care: decision making and evaluation of effectiveness. Department of Health Administration, University of Toronto, 1982.
Busschbach J, Hessing D J, Charro, F T de. Observations on 100 students filling in the EuroQol questionnaire. Quality of Life Research 1994:3(1):71–72.
EuroQol Group. EuroQol — a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990;16:199–208.
Froberg D G, Kane R L. Methodology for measuring health state preferences III: population and context effects. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1989;42:585–92.
Kahneman D, Tversky A. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981;211(4481):453–458.
Kendall M G. Rank correlation methods. 3rd edition, London: Griffin, 1962:146.
Kind P, Dolan P, Gudex C M, Williams A H. Inconsistency and the judgment of health state valuation: a comparison of three scaling methods. IRSS workshop October 1992. University of York.
Read J L, Quinn R J, Berwick DM, Fineberg H V, Weinstein MC. Preferences for health outcomes: comparison of assessment methods, Medical Decision Making 1984;4:315–329.
Rosser R, Kind P. A scale of valuations of states of illness: is there a social consensus? International Journal of Epidemiology 1978;7:347–358.
Torrance G W. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. Journal of Health Economics 1986;5:1–30.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dolan, P., Kind, P. (2005). Inconsistency and health state valuations. In: Kind, P., Brooks, R., Rabin, R. (eds) EQ-5D concepts and methods: A developmental history. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3712-0_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3712-0_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-3711-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-3712-2
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)