Abstract
Purpose
To empirically determine the impact of the capacity to sustain social relationships on valuing health states.
Methods
68 clinical experts conducted a health state valuation exercise in five sites using pairwise comparison, ranking, and person trade-off as elicitation methods. 23,840 pairwise comparisons of a total of 379 health states were analyzed by conditional logistic regression.
Results
Social relationships had a clear monotonic association with perceived disability: the more limited the capacity to sustain social relationships, the more disabling the resulting health state valuations. The highest level of limitations with respect to social relationships was associated with slightly lower impact on health state valuations compared to the highest level of limitations in physical functioning.
Conclusions
Social relationships showed an independent contribution to health state valuations and should be included in health state measures.
Abbreviations
- CLAMES:
-
Classification and Measurement System of Functional Health
- CLR:
-
Conditional logistic regression
- U.S.:
-
United States
- WHO:
-
World Health Organization
References
Murray, C. J. L., Salomon, J., Mathers, C., & Lopez, A. (2002). Summary measures of population health: Concepts, ethics, measurement and applications. Geneva: WHO.
Murray, C. J. L., & Lopez, A. D. (1996). The global burden of disease: A comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from diseases, injuries and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Cambridge, MA: Harvard School of Public Health (on behalf of the WHO and World Bank).
Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M. J., Torrance, G. W., O’Brien, B. J., & Stoddart, G. L. (2005). Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programme (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gold, M. R., Stevenson, D., & Fryback, D. G. (2002). HALYS and QALYS and DALYS, Oh My: Similarities and differences in summary measures of population health. Annual Review of Public Health, 23, 115–134.
Green, C., Brazier, J., & Deverill, M. (2000). Valuing health-related quality of life. A review of health state valuation techniques. Pharmacoeconomics, 17, 151–165.
Morimoto, T., & Fukui, T. (2002). Utilities measured by rating scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble: Review and reference for health care professionals. Journal of Epidemiology, 12, 160–178.
Mortimer, D., & Segal, L. (2008). Comparing the incomparable? A systematic review of competing techniques for converting descriptive measures of health status into QUALY-weights. Medical Decision Making, 28, 66–89.
Rehm, J., & Frick, U. (2010). Valuation of health states in the US study to establish disability weights: Lessons from the literature. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 19, 18–33.
Ryan, M., Scott, D. A., Reeves, C., Bate, A., van Teijlingen, E. R., Russell, E. M., et al. (2001). Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: A systematic review of techniques. Health Technology Assessment, 5, 1–186.
Broome, J. (2004). Weighing lives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McIntosh, C. N., Connor Gorber, S., Bernier, J., & Berthelot, J. M. (2007). Eliciting Canadian population preferences for health states using the Classification and Measurement System of Functional Health (CLAMES). Chronic Diseases in Canada, 28, 29–41.
Kopec, J., & Willison, K. (2003). A comparative review of four preference-weighted measures of health-related quality of life. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56, 317–325.
Luo, N., Johnson, J. A., Shaw, J. W., & Coons, S. J. (2007). A comparison of EQ-5D index scores derived from the US and UK population-based scoring functions. Medical Decision Making, 27, 321–326.
Stiggelbout, A., & de Vogel-Voogt, E. (2008). Health state utilities: A framework for studying the gap between the imagined and the real. Value in Health, 11, 76–87.
WHO. (2006). Basic documents (45th ed., Supplement). Geneva, Switzerland: WHO. http://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf.
Hughner, R. S., & Kleine, S. S. (2004). Views of health in the lay sector: A compilation and review of how individuals think about health. Health (London), 8, 395–422.
Llewellyn-Thomas, H. (1996). Health state descriptions: Purposes, issues, a proposal. Medical Care, 34(12 Suppl), DS109–DS118.
Revicki, D., & Kaplan, R. (1993). Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 2, 477–487.
Dolan, P. (2000). The measurement of health-related quality of life for use in resource allocation decisions in health care. In A. Culyer & J. Newhouse (Eds.), Handbook of health economics (pp. 1724–1760). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Larson, J. S. (1999). The conceptualization of health. Medical Care Research and Review, 56, 123–136.
Francis, B., Dittrich, R., Hatzinger, R., & Penn, R. (2002). Analysing partial ranks by using smoothed paired comparison methods: An investigation of value orientation in Europe. Applied Statistics, 51, 319–336.
Hawthorne, G., Osborne, R. H., Taylor, A., & Sansoni, J. (2007). The SF36 Version 2: Critical analyses of population weights, scoring algorithms and population norms. Quality of Life Research, 16, 661–673.
Beals, J., Welty, T. K., Mitchell, C. M., Rhoades, D. A., Yeh, J. L., Henderson, J. A., et al. (2006). Different factor loadings for SF36: The Strong Heart Study and the National Survey of Functional Health Status. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59, 208–215.
Jenkinson, C., Stewart-Brown, S., Petersen, S., & Paice, C. (1999). Assessment of the SF-36 version 2 in the United Kingdom. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 53, 46–50.
House, J. S., Landis, K. R., & Umberson, D. (1988). Social relationships and health. Science, 241, 540–545.
Kunitz, S. J. (2004). Social capital and health. British Medical Bulletin, 69, 61–73.
Feeny, D., Furlong, W., Torrance, G. W., Goldsmith, C. H., Zhu, Z., DePauw, S., et al. (2002). Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Medical Care, 40, 113–128.
Furlong, W. J., Feeny, D. H., Torrance, G. W., & Barr, R. D. (2001). The Health Utilities Index (HUI) system for assessing health-related quality of life in clinical studies. Annals of Medicine, 33, 375–384.
Ware, J., & Sherbourne, C. (1992). The MOS 36-item short form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483.
Brooks, R. (1996). EuroQoL: The current state of play. Health Policy, 37, 53–72.
EuroQoL Group. (1990). EuroQoL—A new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy, 16, 199–208.
Rabin, R., & de Charro, F. (2001). EQ-5D: A measure of health status from the EuroQoL group. Annals of Medicine, 33, 337–343.
WHO. (2001). International classification of functioning disability and health. Geneva: WHO.
Üstün, T. B., Kostanjsek, N., Chatterji, S., & Rehm, J. (2010). Measuring health and disability. Manual for WHO disability assessment schedule WHODAS 2.0. Geneva: WHO.
Üstün, T. B., Chatterji, S., Kostanjsek, N., Rehm, J., Kennedy, C., Epping-Jordan, J., et al. (2010). Developing the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 88, 815–823.
Acknowledgments
This article was funded by National Institute for Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; contract no. HHSN267200700041C.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Frick, U., Irving, H. & Rehm, J. Social relationships as a major determinant in the valuation of health states. Qual Life Res 21, 209–213 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9945-0
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9945-0