Related Experiment Videos
Putting the quality into quality-adjusted life years
1LSE Health and Social Care, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE. a.j.oliver@lse.ac.uk
Journal of Public Health Medicine
|April 3, 2003
Summary
Developing standardized health state value instruments requires agreement on conceptual parameters. Current methods have inherent biases, necessitating a unified approach for accurate health value elicitation.
Area of Science:
- Health economics
- Outcomes research
- Psychometrics
Background:
- Numerous instruments exist for eliciting health state values.
- These instruments exhibit significant conceptual differences and inherent biases.
- Existing methods lack standardization, impacting value elicitation reliability.
Purpose of the Study:
- To outline the conceptual foundations of principal health state value elicitation instruments.
- To discuss the empirical limitations of current health state value elicitation tools.
- To advocate for a consensus on appropriate conceptual parameters for a standardized instrument.
Main Methods:
- Review of conceptual frameworks for health state value elicitation.
- Analysis of empirical biases and limitations in existing instruments.
- Conceptual argument for parameter standardization.
Main Results:
- Identified significant conceptual divergence among health state value instruments.
- Highlighted inherent biases and empirical limitations affecting elicited values.
- Demonstrated the influence of conceptual parameters on health state values.
Conclusions:
- A broad agreement on conceptual parameters is crucial for advancing health state value elicitation.
- Standardization of instruments will improve the accuracy and comparability of health values.
- Future development should focus on a single, standardized health state value instrument.