Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life
Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
1993 |
|---|
| Umfang: |
11 |
|---|
| Reproduktion: |
Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
in: Quality of life research - 1992, 2(1993) vom: Juni, Seite 477-487 |
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:2 ; year:1993 ; month:06 ; pages:477-487 ; extent:11 |
| Links: |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
NLEJ195670396 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLEJ195670396 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20210708012909.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 070526s1993 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLEJ195670396 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life |
| 264 | 1 | |c 1993 | |
| 300 | |a 11 | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health status measures are at best only moderately correlated with standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. Results from regression analysis, predicting SG or TTO utilities from combinations of health status scales, typically have an R2 of 0.18 to 0.43. Preferences determined by rating scale methods are more strongly related to health status scores, but correlations are variable ranging from 0.17 to 0.46 and only about 27% to 34% of variance can be explained in regression models. The Quality of Well-Being Scale and other multiattribute preference measures have low to moderate correlations with health status measures (r=0.03 to 0.71). Health utility/preference measures and psychometric health status scores are only moderately correlated. Health utility and psychometric health status scales may measure different attributes of health. Although both approaches are useful for evaluating medical outcomes, they are not interchangeable indicators of health-related quality of life. | ||
| 533 | |f Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Revicki, D. A. |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kaplan, R. M. |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i in |t Quality of life research |d 1992 |g 2(1993) vom: Juni, Seite 477-487 |w (DE-627)NLEJ188989161 |w (DE-600)2008960-0 |x 1573-2649 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:2 |g year:1993 |g month:06 |g pages:477-487 |g extent:11 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00422222 |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a ZDB-1-SOJ | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NL_ARTICLE | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 2 |j 1993 |c 6 |h 477-487 |g 11 | ||
| matchkey_str |
article:15732649:1993----::eainhpewepyhmtiadtltbsdprahsohmaueetf |
|---|---|
| hierarchy_sort_str |
1993 |
| publishDate |
1993 |
| allfields |
(DE-627)NLEJ195670396 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life 1993 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health status measures are at best only moderately correlated with standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. Results from regression analysis, predicting SG or TTO utilities from combinations of health status scales, typically have an R2 of 0.18 to 0.43. Preferences determined by rating scale methods are more strongly related to health status scores, but correlations are variable ranging from 0.17 to 0.46 and only about 27% to 34% of variance can be explained in regression models. The Quality of Well-Being Scale and other multiattribute preference measures have low to moderate correlations with health status measures (r=0.03 to 0.71). Health utility/preference measures and psychometric health status scores are only moderately correlated. Health utility and psychometric health status scales may measure different attributes of health. Although both approaches are useful for evaluating medical outcomes, they are not interchangeable indicators of health-related quality of life. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Revicki, D. A. oth Kaplan, R. M. oth in Quality of life research 1992 2(1993) vom: Juni, Seite 477-487 (DE-627)NLEJ188989161 (DE-600)2008960-0 1573-2649 nnns volume:2 year:1993 month:06 pages:477-487 extent:11 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00422222 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 2 1993 6 477-487 11 |
| spelling |
(DE-627)NLEJ195670396 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life 1993 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health status measures are at best only moderately correlated with standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. Results from regression analysis, predicting SG or TTO utilities from combinations of health status scales, typically have an R2 of 0.18 to 0.43. Preferences determined by rating scale methods are more strongly related to health status scores, but correlations are variable ranging from 0.17 to 0.46 and only about 27% to 34% of variance can be explained in regression models. The Quality of Well-Being Scale and other multiattribute preference measures have low to moderate correlations with health status measures (r=0.03 to 0.71). Health utility/preference measures and psychometric health status scores are only moderately correlated. Health utility and psychometric health status scales may measure different attributes of health. Although both approaches are useful for evaluating medical outcomes, they are not interchangeable indicators of health-related quality of life. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Revicki, D. A. oth Kaplan, R. M. oth in Quality of life research 1992 2(1993) vom: Juni, Seite 477-487 (DE-627)NLEJ188989161 (DE-600)2008960-0 1573-2649 nnns volume:2 year:1993 month:06 pages:477-487 extent:11 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00422222 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 2 1993 6 477-487 11 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
(DE-627)NLEJ195670396 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life 1993 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health status measures are at best only moderately correlated with standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. Results from regression analysis, predicting SG or TTO utilities from combinations of health status scales, typically have an R2 of 0.18 to 0.43. Preferences determined by rating scale methods are more strongly related to health status scores, but correlations are variable ranging from 0.17 to 0.46 and only about 27% to 34% of variance can be explained in regression models. The Quality of Well-Being Scale and other multiattribute preference measures have low to moderate correlations with health status measures (r=0.03 to 0.71). Health utility/preference measures and psychometric health status scores are only moderately correlated. Health utility and psychometric health status scales may measure different attributes of health. Although both approaches are useful for evaluating medical outcomes, they are not interchangeable indicators of health-related quality of life. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Revicki, D. A. oth Kaplan, R. M. oth in Quality of life research 1992 2(1993) vom: Juni, Seite 477-487 (DE-627)NLEJ188989161 (DE-600)2008960-0 1573-2649 nnns volume:2 year:1993 month:06 pages:477-487 extent:11 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00422222 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 2 1993 6 477-487 11 |
| allfieldsGer |
(DE-627)NLEJ195670396 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life 1993 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health status measures are at best only moderately correlated with standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. Results from regression analysis, predicting SG or TTO utilities from combinations of health status scales, typically have an R2 of 0.18 to 0.43. Preferences determined by rating scale methods are more strongly related to health status scores, but correlations are variable ranging from 0.17 to 0.46 and only about 27% to 34% of variance can be explained in regression models. The Quality of Well-Being Scale and other multiattribute preference measures have low to moderate correlations with health status measures (r=0.03 to 0.71). Health utility/preference measures and psychometric health status scores are only moderately correlated. Health utility and psychometric health status scales may measure different attributes of health. Although both approaches are useful for evaluating medical outcomes, they are not interchangeable indicators of health-related quality of life. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Revicki, D. A. oth Kaplan, R. M. oth in Quality of life research 1992 2(1993) vom: Juni, Seite 477-487 (DE-627)NLEJ188989161 (DE-600)2008960-0 1573-2649 nnns volume:2 year:1993 month:06 pages:477-487 extent:11 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00422222 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 2 1993 6 477-487 11 |
| allfieldsSound |
(DE-627)NLEJ195670396 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life 1993 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health status measures are at best only moderately correlated with standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. Results from regression analysis, predicting SG or TTO utilities from combinations of health status scales, typically have an R2 of 0.18 to 0.43. Preferences determined by rating scale methods are more strongly related to health status scores, but correlations are variable ranging from 0.17 to 0.46 and only about 27% to 34% of variance can be explained in regression models. The Quality of Well-Being Scale and other multiattribute preference measures have low to moderate correlations with health status measures (r=0.03 to 0.71). Health utility/preference measures and psychometric health status scores are only moderately correlated. Health utility and psychometric health status scales may measure different attributes of health. Although both approaches are useful for evaluating medical outcomes, they are not interchangeable indicators of health-related quality of life. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Revicki, D. A. oth Kaplan, R. M. oth in Quality of life research 1992 2(1993) vom: Juni, Seite 477-487 (DE-627)NLEJ188989161 (DE-600)2008960-0 1573-2649 nnns volume:2 year:1993 month:06 pages:477-487 extent:11 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00422222 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 2 1993 6 477-487 11 |
| language |
English |
| source |
in Quality of life research 2(1993) vom: Juni, Seite 477-487 volume:2 year:1993 month:06 pages:477-487 extent:11 |
| sourceStr |
in Quality of life research 2(1993) vom: Juni, Seite 477-487 volume:2 year:1993 month:06 pages:477-487 extent:11 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Quality of life research |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Revicki, D. A. @@oth@@ Kaplan, R. M. @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
1993-06-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
NLEJ188989161 |
| id |
NLEJ195670396 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ195670396</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20210708012909.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">070526s1993 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ195670396</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">1993</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health status measures are at best only moderately correlated with standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. Results from regression analysis, predicting SG or TTO utilities from combinations of health status scales, typically have an R2 of 0.18 to 0.43. Preferences determined by rating scale methods are more strongly related to health status scores, but correlations are variable ranging from 0.17 to 0.46 and only about 27% to 34% of variance can be explained in regression models. The Quality of Well-Being Scale and other multiattribute preference measures have low to moderate correlations with health status measures (r=0.03 to 0.71). Health utility/preference measures and psychometric health status scores are only moderately correlated. Health utility and psychometric health status scales may measure different attributes of health. Although both approaches are useful for evaluating medical outcomes, they are not interchangeable indicators of health-related quality of life.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="f">Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Revicki, D. A.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kaplan, R. M.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">in</subfield><subfield code="t">Quality of life research</subfield><subfield code="d">1992</subfield><subfield code="g">2(1993) vom: Juni, Seite 477-487</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ188989161</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2008960-0</subfield><subfield code="x">1573-2649</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:2</subfield><subfield code="g">year:1993</subfield><subfield code="g">month:06</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:477-487</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00422222</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-SOJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">2</subfield><subfield code="j">1993</subfield><subfield code="c">6</subfield><subfield code="h">477-487</subfield><subfield code="g">11</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| series2 |
Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)NLEJ188989161 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| collection |
NL |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1573-2649 |
| topic_title |
Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
d a r da dar r m k rm rmk |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Quality of life research |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
NLEJ188989161 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Quality of life research |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)NLEJ188989161 (DE-600)2008960-0 |
| title |
Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life |
| spellingShingle |
Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)NLEJ195670396 |
| title_full |
Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life |
| journal |
Quality of life research |
| journalStr |
Quality of life research |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
1993 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
477 |
| container_volume |
2 |
| physical |
11 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| title_sort |
relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life |
| title_auth |
Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life |
| abstract |
Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health status measures are at best only moderately correlated with standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. Results from regression analysis, predicting SG or TTO utilities from combinations of health status scales, typically have an R2 of 0.18 to 0.43. Preferences determined by rating scale methods are more strongly related to health status scores, but correlations are variable ranging from 0.17 to 0.46 and only about 27% to 34% of variance can be explained in regression models. The Quality of Well-Being Scale and other multiattribute preference measures have low to moderate correlations with health status measures (r=0.03 to 0.71). Health utility/preference measures and psychometric health status scores are only moderately correlated. Health utility and psychometric health status scales may measure different attributes of health. Although both approaches are useful for evaluating medical outcomes, they are not interchangeable indicators of health-related quality of life. |
| abstractGer |
Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health status measures are at best only moderately correlated with standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. Results from regression analysis, predicting SG or TTO utilities from combinations of health status scales, typically have an R2 of 0.18 to 0.43. Preferences determined by rating scale methods are more strongly related to health status scores, but correlations are variable ranging from 0.17 to 0.46 and only about 27% to 34% of variance can be explained in regression models. The Quality of Well-Being Scale and other multiattribute preference measures have low to moderate correlations with health status measures (r=0.03 to 0.71). Health utility/preference measures and psychometric health status scores are only moderately correlated. Health utility and psychometric health status scales may measure different attributes of health. Although both approaches are useful for evaluating medical outcomes, they are not interchangeable indicators of health-related quality of life. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health status measures are at best only moderately correlated with standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. Results from regression analysis, predicting SG or TTO utilities from combinations of health status scales, typically have an R2 of 0.18 to 0.43. Preferences determined by rating scale methods are more strongly related to health status scores, but correlations are variable ranging from 0.17 to 0.46 and only about 27% to 34% of variance can be explained in regression models. The Quality of Well-Being Scale and other multiattribute preference measures have low to moderate correlations with health status measures (r=0.03 to 0.71). Health utility/preference measures and psychometric health status scores are only moderately correlated. Health utility and psychometric health status scales may measure different attributes of health. Although both approaches are useful for evaluating medical outcomes, they are not interchangeable indicators of health-related quality of life. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE |
| title_short |
Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00422222 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Revicki, D. A. Kaplan, R. M. |
| author2Str |
Revicki, D. A. Kaplan, R. M. |
| ppnlink |
NLEJ188989161 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T04:23:22.027Z |
| _version_ |
1803802170650263552 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ195670396</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20210708012909.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">070526s1993 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ195670396</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">1993</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract This paper summarizes selected evidence pertaining to the relationship between psychometric health status measures and utility/preference measures of health outcome. Few studies contain measures of both health status and utility/preference. The evidence to date suggests that various health status measures are at best only moderately correlated with standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. Results from regression analysis, predicting SG or TTO utilities from combinations of health status scales, typically have an R2 of 0.18 to 0.43. Preferences determined by rating scale methods are more strongly related to health status scores, but correlations are variable ranging from 0.17 to 0.46 and only about 27% to 34% of variance can be explained in regression models. The Quality of Well-Being Scale and other multiattribute preference measures have low to moderate correlations with health status measures (r=0.03 to 0.71). Health utility/preference measures and psychometric health status scores are only moderately correlated. Health utility and psychometric health status scales may measure different attributes of health. Although both approaches are useful for evaluating medical outcomes, they are not interchangeable indicators of health-related quality of life.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="f">Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Revicki, D. A.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kaplan, R. M.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">in</subfield><subfield code="t">Quality of life research</subfield><subfield code="d">1992</subfield><subfield code="g">2(1993) vom: Juni, Seite 477-487</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ188989161</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2008960-0</subfield><subfield code="x">1573-2649</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:2</subfield><subfield code="g">year:1993</subfield><subfield code="g">month:06</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:477-487</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00422222</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-SOJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">2</subfield><subfield code="j">1993</subfield><subfield code="c">6</subfield><subfield code="h">477-487</subfield><subfield code="g">11</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4001293 |