Linked Life Data

10159110

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/10159110

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
2
pubmed:dateCreated
1996-8-23
pubmed:abstractText
In eliciting health state valuations, two widely used methods are the standard gamble (SG) and the time trade off (TTO). Both methods make assumptions about individual preferences that are too restrictive to allow them to act as perfect proxies for utility. Therefore, a choice between them might instead be made on empirical grounds. This paper reports on a study which compared a "props" (using specifically-designed boards) and a "no props" (using self-completion booklets) variant of each method. The results suggested that both non props variants might be susceptable to framing effects and that TTP props outperformed SG props.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
H
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Apr
pubmed:issn
0167-6296
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
15
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
209-31
pubmed:dateRevised
2007-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1996
pubmed:articleTitle
Valuing health states: a comparison of methods.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Economics, University of Newcastle, Newcastle-Upon Tyne, UK.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't