Show simple item record

Whose quality of life? A commentary exploring discrepancies between health state evaluations of patients and the general public

dc.contributor.authorUbel, Peter A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorLoewenstein, Georgeen_US
dc.contributor.authorJepson, Christopheren_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-09-08T21:34:40Z
dc.date.available2006-09-08T21:34:40Z
dc.date.issued2003-09en_US
dc.identifier.citationUbel, Peter A.; Loewenstein, George; Jepson, Christopher; (2003). "Whose quality of life? A commentary exploring discrepancies between health state evaluations of patients and the general public." Quality of Life Research 12(6): 599-607. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/43565>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0962-9343en_US
dc.identifier.issn1573-2649en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/43565
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=14516169&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractThere is often a discrepancy between quality of life estimates from patients and the general public. These discrepancies are of concern to the disability community, who worry that the public does not understand how valuable life can be for people with disabilities; policy planners, who must decide whose quality of life estimates to use in economic analysis; and practitioners and patients facing difficult medical decisions, who may have to worry that people have difficulty imagining unfamiliar health states. We outline several factors that may contribute to these discrepancies. Discrepancies might occur because patients and the public interpret health state descriptions differently – for example, making different assumptions about the recency of onset of the health state, or about the presence of comorbidities. Discrepancies might also arise if patients adapt to illness and the public does not predict this adaptation; because of response shift in how people use quality of life scales; because of a focusing illusion whereby people forget to consider obvious aspects of unfamiliar health states; because of contrast effects, whereby negative life events make people less bothered by less severe negative life events; and because of different vantage points, with patients viewing their illness in terms of the benefits that would result from regaining health, while the public views the illness in terms of the costs associated with losing good health. Decisions about whose values to measure for the purposes of economic analyses, and how to measure discrepancies, should take these potential contributing factors into account.en_US
dc.format.extent101448 bytes
dc.format.extent3115 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherKluwer Academic Publishers; Springer Science+Business Mediaen_US
dc.subject.otherMedicine & Public Healthen_US
dc.subject.otherPublic Health/Gesundheitswesenen_US
dc.subject.otherSociologyen_US
dc.subject.otherCost Effectiveness Analysisen_US
dc.subject.otherDisabilityen_US
dc.subject.otherUtilityen_US
dc.subject.otherQuality of Lifeen_US
dc.subject.otherQuality of Life Researchen_US
dc.titleWhose quality of life? A commentary exploring discrepancies between health state evaluations of patients and the general publicen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPublic Healthen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumVA Health Services Research and Development Center of Excellence, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, USA; Program for Improving Health Care Decisions, University of Michigan, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, School of Medicine, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampusAnn Arboren_US
dc.identifier.pmid14516169en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/43565/1/11136_2004_Article_5107167.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1025119931010en_US
dc.identifier.sourceQuality of Life Researchen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.