학제간연구 | Interdisciplinary Studies in Gambling | 跨学科研究
- date : 2015-05-20 01:10|hit : 1358
-
- Article] The construction of standard gamble utilities
-
DocNo of ILP: 3964
Doc. Type: Article
Title: The construction of standard gamble utilities
Authors: Van Osch, SMC; Stiggelbout, AM
Full Name of Authors: Van Osch, Sylvie M. C.; Stiggelbout, Anne M.
Keywords by Author: health-utility measurement; reference point; standard gamble; time trade-off
Keywords Plus: PROSPECT-THEORY; TIME TRADEOFF; RISK; PREFERENCE; DECISION; BIASES; OFFS; LIFE
Abstract: Health effects for cost-effectiveness analysis are best measured in life years, with quality of life in each life year expressed in terms of utilities. The standard gamble (SG) has been the gold standard for utility measurement. However, the biases of probability weighting, loss aversion, and scale compatibility have an inconclusive effect on SG utilities. We determined their effect on SG utilities using qualitative data to assess the reference point and the focus of attention. While thinking aloud, 45 healthy respondents provided SG utilities for six rheumatoid arthritis health states. Reference points, goals, and focuses of attention were coded. To assess the effect of scale compatibility, correlations were assessed between focus of attention and mean utility. The certain outcome served most frequently as reference point, the SG was perceived as a mixed gamble. Goals were mostly mentioned with respect to this outcome. Scale compatibility led to a significant upward bias in utilities; attention lay relatively more on the low outcome and this was positively correlated with mean utility. SG utilities should be corrected for loss aversion and probability weighting with the mixed correction formula proposed by prospect theory. Scale compatibility will likely still bias SG utilities, calling for research on a correction. Copyright (C) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Cate of OECD: Economics and business
Year of Publication: 2008
Business Area: gamble
Detail Business: gamble
Country: England
Study Area: utility, utility, Standardization, probabilityperspective theory, probability, perspective theory, preference, risk
Name of Journal: HEALTH ECONOMICS
Language: English
Country of Authors: [Van Osch, Sylvie M. C.; Stiggelbout, Anne M.] Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Med Decis Making, NL-2300 RC Leiden, Netherlands
Press Adress: Stiggelbout, AM (reprint author), Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Med Decis Making, J10-S,POB 9600, NL-2300 RC Leiden, Netherlands.
Email Address: a.m.stiggetbout@lume.nl
Citaion:
Funding:
Lists of Citation: Baker R, 2004, HEALTH ECON, V13, P37, DOI 10.1002/hec.795; Blatt M., 1988, MED DECISION MAKING; Bleichrodt H, 2002, HEALTH ECON, V11, P447, DOI 10.1002/hec.688; Bleichrodt H, 2001, MANAGE SCI, V47, P1498, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.47.11.1498.10248; Bleichrodt H, 2002, J MATH PSYCHOL, V46, P315, DOI 10.1006/jmps.2001.1390; *CENTR BUR STAT, 2003, DUTCH LIF TABL 2001; Damschroder LJ, 2005, SOC SCI MED, V61, P267, DOI 10.1016/j.soscimed.2004.11.060; De Jong Z, 2004, ARTHRIT RHEUM-ARTHR, V51, P593, DOI 10.1002/art.20531; DELQUIE P, 1993, MANAGE SCI, V39, P1382, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.39.11.1382; Dolan P, 1997, MED CARE, V35, P1095, DOI 10.1097/00005650-199711000-00002; Drummond MF, 1990, METHODS EC EVALUATIO; HARTE JM, 1994, ACTA PSYCHOL, V87, P95, DOI 10.1016/0001-6918(94)90046-9; Heath C, 1999, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V38, P79, DOI 10.1006/cogp.1998.0708; HERSHEY JC, 1985, MANAGE SCI, V31, P1213, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.31.10.1213; HORVATH P, 1993, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V14, P41, DOI 10.1016/0191-8869(93)90173-Z; KAHNEMAN D, 1979, ECONOMETRICA, V47, P263, DOI 10.2307/1914185; Lion R, 2005, J RISK RES, V8, P283, DOI 10.1080/1366987042000192435; LOPES LL, 1984, J EXP PSYCHOL HUMAN, V10, P465, DOI 10.1037//0096-1523.10.4.465; LOPES LL, 1987, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V20, P255, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60416-5; QUIGGIN J, 1982, J ECON BEHAV ORGAN, V3, P323, DOI 10.1016/0167-2681(82)90008-7; Robinson A, 2001, MED DECIS MAKING, V21, P17; *SAWT SOFTW INC, 2000, CI3250 SAWT SOFTW IN; Stalmeier PFM, 1996, MED DECIS MAKING, V16, P36, DOI 10.1177/0272989X9601600111; Sutherland H J, 1982, Med Decis Making, V2, P299, DOI 10.1177/0272989X8200200306; TVERSKY A, 1992, J RISK UNCERTAINTY, V5, P297, DOI 10.1007/BF00122574; Ubel PA, 2003, QUAL LIFE RES, V12, P599, DOI 10.1023/A:1025119931010; van den Hout WB, 2002, EUR J CANCER, V38, P953, DOI 10.1016/S0959-8049(02)00053-9; van Osch SMC, 2004, MED DECIS MAKING, V24, P511, DOI 10.1177/0272989X04268955; van Osch SMC, 2006, MED DECIS MAKING, V26, P338, DOI 10.1177/0272989X06290484; WAKKER P, 1995, MED DECIS MAKING, V15, P180, DOI 10.1177/0272989X9501500212
Number of Citaion: 30
Publication: JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
City of Publication: CHICHESTER
Address of Publication: THE ATRIUM, SOUTHERN GATE, CHICHESTER PO19 8SQ, W SUSSEX, ENGLAND
ISSN: 1057-9230
29-Character Source Abbreviation: HEALTH ECON
ISO Source Abbreviation: Health Econ.
Volume: 17
Version: 1
Start of File: 31
End of File: 40
DOI: 10.1002/hec.1235
Number of Pages: 10
Web of Science Category: Economics; Health Care Sciences & Services; Health Policy & Services
Subject Category: Business & Economics; Health Care Sciences & Services
Document Delivery Number: 257PX
Unique Article Identifier: WOS:000252812100004
- reply : 0
-
- list
-
- prev
- next