Red de Bibliotecas Virtuales de Ciencias Sociales en
América Latina y el Caribe
Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem:
https://biblioteca-repositorio.clacso.edu.ar/handle/CLACSO/109775Registro completo de metadatos
| Campo DC | Valor | Lengua/Idioma |
|---|---|---|
| dc.creator | Espinosa Acuña, Oscar Andrés | - |
| dc.date | 2020-07-01 | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-03-23T15:10:32Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2022-03-23T15:10:32Z | - |
| dc.identifier | https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/ede/article/view/89801 | - |
| dc.identifier | 10.15446/ede.v30n57.89801 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://biblioteca-repositorio.clacso.edu.ar/handle/CLACSO/109775 | - |
| dc.description | The purpose of this research is to identify the main instruments for measuring health states and the methodologies for evaluating preferences, which are used to calculate quality-adjusted life years —QALYs—. From a literature review with a balanced search strategy to identify relevant bibliographic references, the technical characteristics of health classificationsystems are presented, such as functional concepts —social, mental, physical and sensory—, the combination of attributes, the number of different health states, the duration of the survey and its administration. Likewise, referring to the methodologies of valuation of preferences, the particularities on the consistency with the QALY theory, the flexibility in the description of health states, states worse than death, among other aspects, are summarized. It is concluded that there is no one better health status classification system or preference assessment method than another, so the researcher must choose the tool that best suits the condition under analysis and the specific study design. | en-US |
| dc.description | Este trabajo tiene por objetivo identificar los principales instrumentos de medición de estados de salud y las metodologías de valoración de preferencias que se utilizan para calcular los años de vida ajustados por calidad —AVAC—. A partir de una revisión de literatura con una estrategia de búsqueda equilibrada para la identificación de referencias bibliográficas relevantes, se presentan las características técnicas de los sistemas de clasificación en salud, como lo son los conceptos funcionales —sociales, mentales, físicos y sensoriales—, la combinación de atributos, el número de estados de salud diferentes, la duración de la encuesta y su administración. Asimismo, referente a las metodologías de valoración de preferencias, se resumen las particularidades sobre la consistencia con la teoría de los AVAC, la flexibilidad en la descripción de estados de salud, los estados peores que la muerte, entre otros aspectos. Se concluye que no existe un sistema de clasificación de estados de salud o método de valoración de preferencias mejor que otro, por lo que el investigador debe elegir la herramienta que mejor se adapte a la condición bajo análisis y al diseño de estudio en específico. | es-ES |
| dc.format | application/pdf | - |
| dc.language | spa | - |
| dc.publisher | Universidad Nacional de Colombia - Sede Medellín - Facultad de Ciencias Humanas y Económicas - Departamento de Economía | es-ES |
| dc.relation | https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/ede/article/view/89801/78328 | - |
| dc.relation | /*ref*/Abellán-Perpiñan, J., Bleichrodt, H. & Pinto-Prades, J. (2007). Testing the Predictive Validity of the Time Trade-Off and the Standard Gamble (WP ECON 07.17). Recuperado de Working Paper Series, Universidad Pablo de Olivade sitio web: http://www.upo.es/serv/bib/wps/econ0717.pdf Adler, M. (2006). QALYs and Policy Evaluation: A New Perspective. Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics, 6(1), 1–92. Recuperado de https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=655865 Angst, F., Aeschlimann, A., Steiner, W. & Stucki, G. (2001). Responsiveness of the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index as Compared with the SF-36 in Patients with Osteoarthritis of the Legs Undergoing a Comprehensive Rehabilitation Intervention. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 60(9), 834–840. Recuperado de https://ard.bmj.com/content/60/9/834 Augustovski, F., Irazola, V., Velazquez, A., Gibbons, L. & Craig, B. (2009). Argentine Valuation of the EQ-5D Health States. Value in Health, 12(4), 587–596. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1524-4733.2008.00468.X Augustovski, F., Rey-Ares, L. & Gibbons, L. (2013). Atlas argentino de calidad de vida relacionada con la salud: análisis de los datos de la encuesta nacional de factores de riesgo por provincias. Value in Health Regional Issues, 2(3), 398–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.VHRI.2013.10.006 Augustovski, F., Rey-Ares, L., Irazola, V., Garay, O. U., Gianneo, O., Fernández, G., … & Ramos-Goñi, J. M. (2016). An EQ-5D-5L Value Set Based on Uruguayan Population Preferences. Quality of Life Research, 25(2), 323–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1086-4 Bellamy, N. (2002). WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index User Guide - Version V. Brisbane: WOMAC. Bleichrodt, H. & Johannesson, M. (1997). Standard gamble, time trade-off and rating scale: Experimental results on the ranking properties of QALYs. Journal of Health Economics, 16(2), 155–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6296(96)00509-7 Boyle, M. & Torrance, G. (1984). Developing Multiattribute Health Indexes. Medical Care, 22(11), 1045–1057. Recuperado de https://www.jstor.org/stable/3764946 Brazier, J. & Roberts, J. (2004). The Estimation of a Preference-Based Measure of Health From the SF-12. Medical Care, 42(9), 851–859. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000135827.18610.0d Brazier, J., Roberts, J. & Deverill, M. (2002). The Estimation Of A Preference-Based Measure of Health From the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics, 21(2), 271–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-6296(01)00130-8 Brooks, R. (1996). EuroQol: The Current State of Play. Health Policy, 37(1), 53–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(96)00822-6 Brooks, R. (2013). The EuroQol Group after 25 years. Dordrecht: Springer. Brouwer, W., Culyer, A., van Exel, N. & Rutten, F. (2008). Welfarism vs. Extra-Welfarism. Journal of Health Economics, 27(2), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2007.07.003 Burbano-Levy, X., Cardona, D., Palacios, E., Rico, I. & Zapata, L. (2014). Costo utilidad de colágena polivinil-pirrolidona en el tratamiento de osteartrosis de rodilla en México. Value in Health Regional Issues, 5, 40–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vhri.2014.06.006 Calixto, O., Vargas-Zambrano, J., Franco, J., Molano-González, N., Salazar, J., Rodríguez-Jímenez, M., … & Rojas-Villarraga, A. (2015). El costo de la atención ambulatoria del lupus eritematoso sistémico en Colombia. Contrastes y comparaciones con otras poblaciones. Recuperado de Universidad Colegio Mayor de Nuestra Señora del Rosario - Universidad CES sitio web: http://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/10533 Chen, M., Bush, J. & Patrick, D. (1975). Social Indicators for Health Planning and Policy Analysis. Policy Sciences, 6, 71–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00186756 Chicaíza, L., García-Molina, M. & Romano, G. (2013). Análisis costo utilidad: evolución, fundamentos e implicaciones. Coyuntura Económica, 43(2), 97–111. Recuperado de https://www.repository.fedesarrollo.org.co/bitstream/handle/11445/264/Co_Eco_Sem2_2013_Chicaiza_Garcia_y_Romano.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y Craig, B. (2016). Unchained Melody: Revisiting the Estimation of SF-6D Values. The European Journal of Health Economics, 17(7), 865–873. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-015-0727-4 Cruz, L., Camey, S., Hoffmann, J., Rowen, D., Brazier, J., Fleck, M. & Polanczyk, C. (2011). Estimating the SF-6D Value Set for a Population-Based Sample of Brazilians. Value in Health, 14(5), S108–S114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.05.012 Drummond, M., Sculpher, M., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G. & Torrance, G. (2005). Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Duque-Henao, S. & Vásquez-Velásquez, J. (2010). Riesgo cardiovascular, calidad de vida y años de vida ajustados por calidad: un estudio de caso. Investigación y Educación en Enfermería, 28(1), 32–42. Recuperado de https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/iee/article/view/5478 Erickson, P., Wilson, R. & Shannon, I. (1995). Years of Healthy Life. Healthy People 2000 Statistical Notes, 7, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/e583992012-001 Espinosa-Acuña, O. (2012). Metodologías para hallar QALYs. Una revisión de literatura (Econografos N° 21). Recuperado de Universidad Nacional de Colombia sitio web: http://www.fce.unal.edu.co/media/files/econografos_escuela_de_economa_n_21_espinosa_acua.pdf Feeny, D., Furlong, W., Torrance, G. W., Goldsmith, C. H., Zhu, Z., Depauw, S., …& Boyle, M. (2002). Multiattribute and Single-Attribute Utility Functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 System. Medical Care, 40(2), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-200202000-00006 Fitzpatrick, F., Davey, D., Buxton, B. & Jones, J. (1998). Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment, 2(14). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta2140 Freyd, M. (1923). The Graphic Rating Scale. Journal of Educational Psychology, 14(2), 83–102. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0074329 Gafni, A. (1994). The Standard Gamble Method: What is Being Measured and How It Is Interpreted. Health Services Research, 29(2), 207–224. Recuperado de https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1069999/pdf/hsresearch00052-0076.pdf Galante, J., Augustovski, F., Colantonio, L., Bardach, A., Caporale, J., Marti, S. & Kind, P. (2011). Estimation and Comparison of EQ-5D Health States’ Utility Weights for Pneumoccocal and Human Papillomavirus Diseases in Argentina, Chile, and the United Kingdom. Value in Health, 14(5), S60–S64. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JVAL.2011.05.007 Guyatt, G., Deyo, R., Charlson, M., Levine, M. & Mitchell, A. (1989). Responsiveness and validity in health status measurement: A clarification. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 42(5), 403–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(89)90128-5 Hawthorne, G., Richardson, J. & Day, N. (2001). A Comparison of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) with Four Other Generic Utility Instruments. Annals of Medicine, 33(5), 358–370. https://doi.org/10.3109/07853890109002090 Hayes, M. & Patterson, D. (1921). Experimental Development of the Graphical Rating Method. Psychological Bulletin, 18, 98–99. Kaplan, R., Bush, J. & Berry, C. (1976). Health Status: Types of Validity and the Index of Well-Being. Health Services Research, 11(4), 478–507. Recuperado de http://rmkaplan.bol.ucla.edu/Robert_M._Kaplan/1976_Publications_files/0039.pdf Kaplan, R., Bush, J. & Berry, C. (1979). Health Status Index: Category Rating versus Magnitude Estimation for Measuring Levels of Well-Being. Medical Care, 17(5), 501–525. Recuperado de https://www.jstor.org/stable/3764253 Kaplan, R., Anderson, J. & Ganiats, T. (1993). The Quality of Well-Being Scale: Rationale for A Single Quality of Life Index. En S. Walker & R. Rosser (Eds.), Quality of Life Assessment Key Issues in the 1990s (pp. 65–94). Lancaster: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Kaplan, R., Sieber, W. & Ganiats, T. (1997). The Quality of Well-Being Scale: Comparison of the Interviewer-Administered Version with a Self-Administered Questionnaire. Psychology & Health, 12(6), 783–791. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870449708406739 Kaplan, R., Ganiats, T., Sieber, W. & Anderson, J. (1998). The Quality of Well-Being Scale: Critical Similarities and Differences with SF-36. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 10(6), 509–520. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/10.6.509 Keaei, M., Kuhlmann, J., Conde, R., Evers, S., Gonzalez, J., Govers, M. & Hiligsmann, M. (2016). Health-Related Quality of Life of Patients with HIV/AIDS in Bogotá, Colombia. Value in Health Regional Issues, 11, 68–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vhri.2016.05.001 Kirshner, B. & Guyatt, G. (1985). A Methodological Framework for Assessing Health Indices. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 38(1), 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9681(85)90005-0 Klarman, H., Francis, J. & Rosenthal, G. (1968). Cost Effectiveness Analysis Applied to the Treatment of Chronic Renal Disease. Medical Care, 6(1), 48–54. Recuperado de https://www.jstor.org/stable/3762651 Lee, G., Salomon, J., LeBaron, C. & Lieu, T. (2005). Health-State Valuations for Pertussis: Methods for Valuing Short-Term Health States. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 3(17), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-3-17 McConnell, S., Kolopack, P. & Davis, A. (2001). The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC): A Review of Its Utility and Measurement Properties. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 45(5), 453–461. https://doi.org/10.1002/1529-0131(200110)45:5<453::aid-art365>3.0.co;2-w McDonough, C., Grove, M., Tosteson, T., Lurie, J., Hilibrand, A. & Tosteson, A. (2005). Comparison of EQ-5D, HUI, and SF-36-Derived Societal Health State Values Among Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) Participants. Quality of Life Research, 14(5), 1321–1332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-004-5743-2 Merlino, L., Bagchi, I., Taylor, T., Utrie, P., Chrischilles, E., Sumner, W., … & Saag, K. (2001). Preference for Fractures and Other Glucocorticoid-Associated Adverse Effects Among Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients. Medical Decision Making, 21(2), 122–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X0102100205 Muennig, P. & Gold, M. (2001). Using the Years-of-Healthy-Life Measure to Calculate QALYs. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 20(1), 35–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(00)00261-0 Neumann, P., Sanders, G., Russell, L., Siegel, J. & Ganiats, T. (2016). Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine (2a ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS). (2014). Documentos básicos. 48a edición. Recuperado de https://apps.who.int/gb/bd/PDF/bd48/basic-documents-48th-edition-sp.pdf?ua=1 Patrick, D. & Erickson, P. (1993). Health Status and Health Policy: Quality of Life in Health Care Evaluation and Resource Allocation. Nueva York: Oxford University Press. Pliskin, J., Shepard, D. & Weinstein, M. (1980). Utility Functions For Life Years And Health Status. Operations Research, 28(1), 206–224. Recuperado de https://www.jstor.org/stable/172147 Prieto, L. & Sacristán, J. (2003). Problems and solutions in calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 1(1), 80. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-1-80 Prosser, L., Ray, G., O’Brien, M., Kleinman, K., Santoli, J. & Lieu, T. (2004). Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Health States Prevented by Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine. Pediatrics, 113(2), 283–290. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.113.2.283 Rodríguez-Míguez, E., Abellán-Perpiñán, J., Alvarez, X., González, X. & Sampayo, A. (2016). The DEP-6D, a New Preference-Based Measure to Assess Health States of Dependency. Social Science & Medicine, 153, 210–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SOCSCIMED.2016.02.020 San Martín, H. & Pastor, V. (1989). Economía de la salud. Medicina y sociedad. Ciudad de México: Interamericana McGraw-Hill. Santos, M., Cintra, M., Monteiro, A., Santos, B., Gusmão-filho, F., Viegas-Andrade, M., …& Kind, P. (2016). Brazilian Valuation of EQ-5D-3L Health States: Results from a Saturation Study. Medical Decision Making, 36(2), 253–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X15613521 Seiber, W., Groessl, E., David, K., Ganiats, T. & Kaplan, R. (2008). Quality of Well Being Self-Administered (QWB-SA) Scale. User’s Manual. California: Health Services Research Center. Shmueli, A., Messika, D., Murad, H. & Freedman, L. (2008). Does Greater Exposure to Own-Health Data Make a Difference on the Visual Analog Scale? The European Journal of Health Economics, 9(1), 63–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-007-0040-y Sintonen, H. (1994). The 15-D Measure of Health Related Quality of Life: Reliability, Validity and Sensitivity of Its Health State Descriptive System. (Working Paper N° 41). Recuperado de Centre for Health Program Evaluation sitio web: https://business.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/391374/wp41-1.pdf Swan, S., Fryback, D., Lawrence, W., Sainfort, F., Hagenauer, M. & Heisey, D. (2000). A Time-Tradeoff Method for Cost—Effectiveness Models Applied To Radiology. Medical Decision Making, 20(1), 79–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X0002000110 Torrance, G., Thomas, W. & Sackett, D. (1972). A Utility Maximization Model for Evaluation of Health Care Programs. Health Services Research, 7(2), 118–133. Recuperado de https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1067402/ Torrance, G., Feeny, D. & Furlong, W. (1996). Health Utilities Index. En B. Spilker (Ed.), Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials (pp. 239–252). Minnesota: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Torrance, G., Feeny, D., Furlong, W., Barr, R., Zhang, Y. & Wang, Q. (1996). Multiattribute Utility Function for a Comprehensive Health Status Classification System: Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Medical Care, 34(7), 702–722. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199607000-00004 Ware, J. & Sherbourne, C. (1992). The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual Framework and Item Selection. Medical Care, 30(6), 473–483. Recuperado de https://www.jstor.org/stable/3765916 Ware, J., Kosinski, M. & Keller, S. (1994). SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A User’s Manual. Recuperado de Health Assessment Lab, New England Medical Center sitio web: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292390260_SF-36_Physical_and_Mental_Health_Summary_Scales_a_User's_Manual Ware, J., Kosinski, M. & Keller, S. D. (1996). A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: Construction of Scales and Preliminary Tests of Reliability and Validity. Medical care, 34(3), 220–233. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003 Ware, J., Snow, K., Kosinski, M. & Gandek, B. (1993). SF-36 Health Survey Manual and interpretation Guide. Recuperado de Health Assessment Lab, New England Medical Center sitio web: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292390260_SF-36_Physical_and_Mental_Health_Summary_Scales_a_User's_Manual Weinstein, M., Torrance, G. & McGuire, A. (2009). QALYs: The Basics. Value in Health, 12(S1), S5–S9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00515.x Wewers, M. & Lowe, N. (1990). A Critical Review of Visual Analogue Scales in the Measurement of Clinical Phenomena. Research in Nursing & Health, 13(4), 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.4770130405 Whitehead, S. & Ali, S. (2010). Health Outcomes in Economic Evaluation: The QALY and Utilities. British Medical Bulletin, 96(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldq033 Wright, D., Wittenberg, E., Swan, J., Miksad, R. & Prosser, L. (2008). PMC30 A Review and Critique of Methods for Measuring Temporary Health States in Cost-Utility Analyses. Value in Health, 11(3), A177–A178. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1098-3015(10)70564-7 Wright, D., Wittenberg, E., Swan, S., Miksad, R. & Prosser, L. (2009). Methods for Measuring Temporary Health States for Cost-Utility Analyses. PharmacoEconomics, 27(9), 713–723. https://doi.org/10.2165/11317060-000000000-00000 Zarate, V., Kind, P., Valenzuela, P., Vignau, A., Olivares-Tirado, P. & Munoz, A. (2011). Social Valuation of EQ-5D Health States: The Chilean Case. Value in Health, 14(8), 1135–1141. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JVAL.2011.09.002 Zeckhauser, R. & Shepard, D. (1976). Where Now for Saving Lives? Law and Contemporary Problems, 40(4), 5–45. Recuperado de https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3493&context=lcp&httpsredir=1&referer) | - |
| dc.relation | /*ref*/ | - |
| dc.rights | Derechos de autor 2020 Ensayos de Economía | es-ES |
| dc.rights | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 | es-ES |
| dc.source | Ensayos de Economía; Vol. 30 No. 57 (2020): julio-diciembre 2020; 175-193 | en-US |
| dc.source | Ensayos de Economía; Vol. 30 Núm. 57 (2020): julio-diciembre 2020; 175-193 | es-ES |
| dc.source | Ensayos de Economía; Vol. 30 No. 57 (2020): julio-diciembre 2020; 175-193 | fr-CA |
| dc.source | 2619-6573 | - |
| dc.source | 0121-117X | - |
| dc.subject | años de vida ajustados por calidad | es-ES |
| dc.subject | economía de la salud | es-ES |
| dc.subject | sistemas de clasificación en salud | es-ES |
| dc.subject | valoración de preferencias | es-ES |
| dc.subject | JEL: I10, B41, D60. | es-ES |
| dc.subject | Economía | es-ES |
| dc.subject | quality-adjusted life years | en-US |
| dc.subject | health economics | en-US |
| dc.subject | health classification systems | en-US |
| dc.subject | preference assessment | en-US |
| dc.subject | JEL: I10, B41, D60. | en-US |
| dc.subject | Economy | en-US |
| dc.title | Classification of Health States and Preference Assessment Methodologies for Calculating Qalys: A Literature Review | en-US |
| dc.title | Clasificación de estados de salud y metodologías de valoración de preferencias para el cálculo de AVAC: una revisión de literatura | es-ES |
| dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | - |
| dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion | - |
| Aparece en las colecciones: | Facultad de Ciencias Humanas y Económicas - FCHE/UNAL - Cosecha | |
Ficheros en este ítem:
No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.
Los ítems de DSpace están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.