Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen

Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie heeft ervoor gezorgd dat je Mijn BSL eenvoudig en snel kunt raadplegen. Je kunt je links eenvoudig registreren. Met deze gegevens kun je thuis, of waar ook ter wereld toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL. Heb je een vraag, neem dan contact op met helpdesk@thim.nl.

» Andere revante producten voor THIM studenten en medewerkers.

Registreer

Om ook buiten de locaties van THIM, thuis bijvoorbeeld, van Mijn BSL gebruik te kunnen maken, moet je jezelf eenmalig registreren. Dit kan alleen vanaf een computer op een van de locaties van THIM.

Eenmaal geregistreerd kun je thuis of waar ook ter wereld onbeperkt toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Login

Als u al geregistreerd bent, hoeft u alleen maar in te loggen om onbeperkt toegang te krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in:

01-10-2014

Modelling utility weights for the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-8D

Auteurs: Jeff Richardson, Kompal Sinha, Angelo Iezzi, Munir A. Khan

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 8/2014

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

The objective of this paper is to describe the four-stage methodology used to obtain utility scores for the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-8D, a 35-item 8 dimension multi-attribute utility instrument, which was created to achieve a high degree of sensitivity to psycho-social health.

Methods

Data for the analyses were obtained from a representative group of 347 members of the Australian public and from 323 mental health patients each of whom provided VAS and time trade-off valuations of multiple health states. Data were used initially to create multiplicative scoring algorithms for each of the instrument’s 8 dimensions and for the overall instrument. Each of the algorithms was then subject to a second-stage econometric ‘correction’.

Results

Algorithms were successfully created for each of the AQoL-8D’s dimensions, for physical and mental ‘super-dimensions’ and for the overall AQoL-8D instrument. The final AQoL-8D algorithm has good predictive power with respect to the TTO valuations.

Conclusions

The AQoL-8D is a suitable instrument for researchers conducting cost utility analyses generally but, in particular, for the analysis of services affecting psycho-social health.
vorige artikel Exploring psychometric properties of the SF-6D, a preference-based health-related quality of life measure, in the context of spinal cord injury
volgende artikel Cappelleri JC, Zou KH, Bushmakin AG, Alvir JMJ, Alemayehu D, Symonds T: Patient-reported outcomes, measurement, implementation and interpretation
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
Brazier, J., Ratcliffe, J., Salomon, J., & Tsuchiya, A. (2007). Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2.
Richardson, J., McKie, J., & Bariola, E. (2014). Multi attribute utility instruments and their use. In A. J. Culyer (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Health Economics. San Diego: Elsevier Science.
3.
Moock, J., & Kohlmann, T. (2008). Comparing preference-based quality-of-life measures: Results from rehabilitation patients with musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, or psychosomatic disorders. Quality of Life Research, 17, 485–495.
4.
Fryback, D. G., Palta, M., Cherepanov, D., Bolt, D., & Kim, J. (2010). Comparison of 5 health related quality of life indexes using item response theory analysis. Medical Decision Making, 30, 5–15.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
5.
Dolan, P., Lee, H., & Peasgood, T. (2012). Losing sight of the wood for the trees: Some issues in describing and valuing health, and another possible approach. Pharmacoeconomics, 30, 1035–1049.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Bowling, A. (1995). What things are important in people’s lives? A survey of the public’s judgements to inform scales of health related quality of life. Social Science and Medicine, 41, 1447–1462.PubMedCrossRef
7.
8.
Richardson, J., Day, N. A., Peacock, S., & Iezzi, A. (2004). Measurement of the quality of life for economic evaluation and the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) mark 2 instrument. Australian Economic Review, 37, 62–88.CrossRef
9.
Richardson, J., Elsworth, G., Iezzi, A., Khan, M. A., Mihalopoulos, C., Schweitzer, I., et al. (2011). Increasing the sensitivity of the AQoL inventory for evaluation of interventions affecting mental health, research paper 61. Melbourne: Centre for Health Economics, Monash University.
10.
McDonald, R. P. (2005). Semiconfirmatory factor analysis: The example of anxiety and depression. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 12, 163–172.CrossRef
11.
Sintonen, H., & Pekurinen, M. (1989). A generic 15 dimensional measure of health-related quality of life (15D). Journal of Social Medicine, 26, 85–96.
12.
Torrance, G., Boyle, M., & Horwood, S. (1982). Application of multi-attribute utility theory to measure social preferences for health status. Operations Research, 30, 1043–1069.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Feeny, D., Furlong, W., & Torrance, G. (1996). Health Utilities Index Mark 2 and Mark 3 (HUI 2/3) 15 item questionnaire for self-administered, self assessed usual health status. Hamilton, ON: Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University.
14.
Feeny, D., Furlong, W., Torrance, G., Goldsmith, C., Zhu, Z., DePauw, S., et al. (2002). Multi attribute and single attribute utility functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 system. Medical Care, 40, 113–128.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Hawthorne, G., Richardson, J., & Osborne, R. (1999). The Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument: A psychometric measure of health related quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 8, 209–224.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Von Winterfeldt, D., & Edwards, W. (1986). Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
18.
Brazier, J., Roberts, J., & Deverill, M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics, 21, 271–292.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test validation. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
20.
Streiner, D., & Norman, G. R. (2003). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21.
Iezzi, A., & Richardson, J. (2009). Measuring quality of life at the CHE: Description of instruments, interview props and their administration, research paper 41. Melbourne: Centre for Health Economics, Monash University.
22.
Richardson, J., Iezzi, A., Khan, M. A., Sinha, K., Mihalopoulos, C., Herrman, H., et al. (2009). Data used in the development of the AQoL-8D (PsyQoL) quality of life instrument, research paper 40. Melbourne: Centre for Health Economics, Monash University.
23.
Hoinville, G., Jowell, R., Airey, C., Brook, J., Courtenay, G., Hedges, B., et al. (1977). Survey research practice. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
24.
25.
26.
Richardson, J., Iezzi, A., Khan, M. A., & Maxwell, A. (2013). Validity and reliability of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL-8D) multi attribute utility instrument. The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research. doi:10.​1007/​s40271-013-0036-x.
27.
Richardson, J., Khan, M. A., Chen, G., Iezzi, A., & Maxwell, A. (2012). Population norms and Australian profile using the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) 8D utility instrument, research paper 72. Melbourne: Centre for Health Economics, Monash University.
28.
Metagegevens
Titel
Modelling utility weights for the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-8D
Auteurs
Jeff Richardson
Kompal Sinha
Angelo Iezzi
Munir A. Khan
Publicatiedatum
01-10-2014
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 8/2014
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0686-8

Andere artikelen Uitgave 8/2014

Improving the mapping of condition-specific health-related quality of life onto SF-6D score

Physical activity in relation to quality of life in newly diagnosed colon cancer patients: a 24-month follow-up

Cappelleri JC, Zou KH, Bushmakin AG, Alvir JMJ, Alemayehu D, Symonds T: Patient-reported outcomes, measurement, implementation and interpretation

  • Book Review

Patient’s response to a simple question on recovery after hemodialysis session strongly associated with scores of comprehensive tools for quality of life and depression symptoms

Assessing quality of life in young adult cancer survivors: development of the Survivorship-Related Quality of Life scale

Comparison between the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-5D-3L in patients with hepatitis B