【24h】

Effects on preferences of violations of procedural invariance.

机译:对违反程序不变性偏好的影响。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

BACKGROUND: In studies of health preferences, utilities for hypothetical health states cannot always be successfully measured. One marker for unsuccessful measurement is violation of "procedural invariance": when the ranking of two health states varies across assessment procedures. Using preference values based on unsuccessful measurement may result in misinterpretation of patients' attitudes about health. OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to determine whether people who violated procedural invariance had different preferences than people who satisfied it. METHODS: They performed secondary analyses of three completed studies that used the same two assessment procedures, identifying participants who violated procedural invariance and comparing the mean standard gamble (SG) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores of violators and satisfiers. PARTICIPANTS: Experiment 1, 30 healthy volunteers and 30 patients with cardiac arrhythmias; experiment 2, 139 patients with depressive illness; experiment 3, 98 family members of patients with schizophrenia. RESULTS: Rates of violation of procedural invariance ranged from 16% to 32%. Violation of procedural invariance was not associated with age, education level, race, or gender. Subjects with violations of procedural invariance had, in general, less ability to discriminate among states and less reliable VAS and SG measurements, and sometimes had different mean SG and VAS values. CONCLUSIONS: Violation of procedural invariance of preferences across scaling methods may be a signal for failure of the measurement process. Researchers should test for procedural invariance and consider reporting data separately for satisfiers and violators.
机译:背景:在健康偏好研究中,假设健康状态的效用并不总是能够成功地测量。测量失败的一个标志是违反“过程不变性”:当两种健康状态的排名在评估程序中有所不同时。使用基于不成功测量的偏好值可能会导致对患者对健康态度的误解。目的:作者试图确定违反程序不变性的人是否与满足程序不变性的人有不同的偏好。方法:他们对三个完成的研究进行了二次分析,这些研究使用相同的两个评估程序,确定了违反程序不变性的参与者,并比较了违规者和满意者的平均标准赌博(SG)和视觉模拟量表(VAS)得分。参与者:实验1,30名健康志愿者和30名心律不齐的患者;实验2,139名抑郁症患者;实验3,精神分裂症患者的98个家庭成员。结果:违反程序不变性的比例从16%到32%不等。违反程序不变性与年龄,受教育程度,种族或性别无关。一般而言,违反程序不变性的受试者区分状态的能力较低,VAS和SG测量值的可靠性较差,并且有时SG和VAS的平均值不同。结论:跨缩放方法违反偏好的程序不变性可能是衡量过程失败的信号。研究人员应测试程序的不变性,并考虑为满意者和违反者分别报告数据。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号