Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Quality of Life Research
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research 12/2016

21.07.2016

The impact of a belief in life after death on health-state preferences: True difference or artifact?

verfasst von: Michał Jakubczyk, Dominik Golicki, Maciej Niewada

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 12/2016

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Purpose

In most religions, the preservation of one’s own, God-given, life is considered obligatory, while the time trade-off method (TTO) forces one to voluntarily forego life years. We sought to verify how this conflict impacts TTO-results among the religious.

Methods

We used the data from the only EQ-5D valuation in Poland (2008, three-level, 321 respondents, 23 states each)—a very religious, mostly Catholic country. We measured the religiosity with the belief in afterlife question on two levels: strong (definitely yes) and some (also rather yes), both about a third of the sample.

Results

The religious more often are non-traders, unwilling to give up any time in exchange for quality of life: odds ratio (OR) equal to 1.97 (strong religiosity), OR 1.55 (some religiosity); and less often consider a state worse than death: OR 0.67 (strong), OR 0.81 (some). These associations are statistically significant (\(p^*<0.001\)) and hold when controlling for possible demographic confounders. Strong religiosity abates the utility loss: in the additive approach by 0.14, in the multiplicative approach by the factor of 2.1 (both \(p^*<0.001\)), especially among the older. Removing the effect of religiosity from the value set reduces the utility by 0.05 on average.

Conclusion

The results may stem from a true difference in preferences or be a TTO-artifact and would vanish for other elicitation methods. Juxtaposing our findings with comments from respondents in other studies suggests the latter. Therefore, this Weltanschauung effect should be removed in cost–utility analysis.
Vorheriger Artikel A systematic review of measurement properties of the instruments measuring health-related quality of life in patients with irritable bowel syndrome
Nächster Artikel EQ-5D-derived health utilities and minimally important differences for chronic health conditions: 2011 Commonwealth Fund Survey of Sicker Adults in Canada

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
And for several years, EQ-5D-5L has been being developed [24].
 
2
Using so many states in the valuation process was shown not to cause any problems [19, 20].
 
3
Provocatively, one might then say that this disappearance may be an artifact. It seems highly improbable, however, for an elicitation technique to exactly offset the true difference in preferences.
 
4
Personal e-mail correspondence with K. Rand-Hendriksen, University of Oslo, a co-author of the [5] study.
 
5
We are a bit informal, as no expected value can be calculated in the space of health states; but the intuition is, hopefully, clear.
 
6
The elicitation method much closer to how the values are then used is the person-trade-off (PTO), in which benefits in various groups of patients are compared; PTO is difficult in practice, e.g. due to fragility to framing [28, 29], and not popular in practice [focusing on health gains might make the result depend on the reference point, see Nord et al. [4].
 
7
We only used a crude definition, compare, e.g. [18].
 
Literatur
1.
Al Sayah, F., Mladenovic, A., Gabel, K., Xie, F., & Johnson, J. (2016). How dead is dead? Qualitative findings from participants of combined traditional and lead time time trade-off valuations. Quality of Life Research, 25, 35–43.CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Attema, A., Versteegh, M. M., Oppe, M., Brouwer, W. B., & Stolk, E. (2013). Lead time TTO: Leading to better health state valuations? Health Economics, 22, 376–392.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Au Eong, K., Chan, E., Luo, N., Wong, S., Tan, N., Lim, T., et al. (2012). Validity of EuroQOL-5D, time trade-off, and standard gamble for age-related macular degeneration in the Singapore population. Eye, 26, 379–388.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Augestad, L., Rand-Hendriksen, K., Stavem, K., & Kristiansen, I. (2013). Time trade-off and attitudes toward euthanasia: Implications of using ‘death’ as an anchor in health state valuation. Quality of Life Research, 22, 705–714.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Balboni, T., Paulk, M., Balboni, M., Phelps, A., Loggers, E., Wright, A., et al. (2010). Provision of spiritual care to patients with advanced cancer: Associations with medical care and quality of life near death. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28, 445–452.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Bansback, N., Brazier, J., Tsuchiya, A., & Anis, A. (2012). Using a discrete choice experiment to estimate health state utility values. Journal of Health Economics, 31, 306–318.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Bleichrodt, H., Wakker, P., & Johannesson, M. (1997). Characterizing QALYs by risk neutrality. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 15, 107–114.CrossRef
9.
Boguszewski, R. (2012). Zmiany w zakresie wiary i religijności Polaków po śmierci Jana Pawła II. Komunikat z badań. BS/49/2012. Technical report, Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej.
10.
Boguszewski, R. (2015). Kanon wiary Polaków. Komunikat z badań CBOS. Nr 29/2015. Technical Report, Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej.
11.
Brooks, R., & De Charro, F. (1996). EuroQol: The current state of play. Health Policy, 37, 53–72.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Danyliv, A., & O’Neill, C. (2015). Attitudes toward legaliing physician provided euthanasia in Britain: The role of religion over time. Social Science & Medicine, 128, 52–56.CrossRef
13.
Devlin, N., Tsuchiya, A., Buckingham, K., & Tilling, C. (2011). A uniform time trade-off method for states better and worse than dead: Feasibility study of the ‘lead time’ approach. Health Economics, 20, 348–361.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Dolan, P., Gudex, C., Kind, P., & Williams, A. (1996). The time trade-off method: Results from a general population study. Health Economics, 5, 141–154.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Ellis, L., Wahab, E., & Ratnasingan, M. (2013). Religiously and fear of death: A three country comparison. Mental Health, Religion and Culture, 16, 179–199.CrossRef
16.
17.
18.
Gielen, J., Van den Branden, S., & Broeckaert, B. (2009). The operationalisation of religion and world view in surveys of nurses’ attitudes toward euthanasia and assited suicide. Medicine, Health Care, and Philosophy, 12, 423–431.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Golicki, D., Jakubczyk, M., Niewada, M., Wrona, W., & Busschbach, J. (2010). Valuation of EQ-5D Health States in Poland: First TTO-based social value set in Central and Eastern Europe. Value in Health, 13, 289–297.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Golicki, D., Jakubczyk, M., Niewada, M., Wrona, W., & Busschbach, J. (2013). Is extending of a TTO experiment to 23 states per respondent justifiable? An empirical answer from Polish EQ-5D valuation study. Journal of Health Policy & Outcomes Research, 1, 110–117.
21.
Gray, J., Lie, M., Murtagh, M., Ford, G., McMeekin, P., & Thomson, R. (2014). Health state descriptions to elicit stroke values: Do they reflect patient experience of stroke? BMC Health Services Research, 14, 573.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Green, C., Brazier, J., & Deverill, M. (2000). Valuing health-related quality of life. A review of health state valuation techniques. Pharmacoeconomics, 17, 151–165.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Hall, S., & Beatty, S. (2014). Assessing spiritual well-being in residents of nursing homes for older people using the FACIT-Sp-12: A cognitive interviewing study. Quality of Life Research, 23, 1701–1711.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., et al. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research : An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 20, 1727–1736.CrossRef
25.
Jakubczyk, M. (2009). Impact of complementarity and heterogeneity on health-related utility of life. Central European Journal of Economic Modeling and Econometrics, 1, 139–156.
26.
Leightner, J., & Inoue, T. (2012). Solving the omitted variables problem of regression analysis using the relative vertical position of observations. Advances in Decision Sciences. doi:10.​1155/​2012/​728980.
27.
Matza, L., Boye, K., Feeny, D., Johnston, J., Bowman, L., & Jordan, J. (2014). Impact of caregiver and parenting status on time trade-off and standard gamble utility scores for health state descriptions. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 12, 48. doi:10.​1186/​1477-7525-12-48.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Nord, E. (1992). Methods for quality adjustment of life years. Social Science & Medicine, 34, 559–569.CrossRef
29.
Nord, E. (1995). The person-trade-off approach to valuing health care programs. Medical Decision-Making, 15, 201–208.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Nord, E., Daniels, N., & Kamlet, M. (2009). QALYs: Some challenges. Value in Health, 12(Supp. 1), S10–S15.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Papageorgiou, K., Vermeulen, K., Leijten, F., Buskens, E., Ranchor, A., & Schroevers, M. (2014). Valuation of depression co-occurring with a somatic condition: Feasibility of the time trade-off task. Health Expectations, 18, 3147–3159.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Phelps, A., Maciejewski, P., Nilsson, M., Balboni, T., Wright, A., Paulk, M., et al. (2009). Religious coping and use of intensive life-prolonging care near death in patients with advanced cancer. Journal of the American Medical Association, 301, 1140–1147.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Robinson, A., Dolan, P., & Williams, A. (1997). Valuing health status using VAS and TTO: What lies behind the numbers? Social Science & Medicine, 45, 1289–1297.CrossRef
34.
Seale, C. (2009). Legalization of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide: Survey of doctors’ attitudes. Palliative Medicine, 23, 205–212.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Sterba, K., Burris, J., Heiney, S., Ruppel, M., Ford, M., & Zapka, J. (2014). “We both just trusted and leaned on the Lord”: A qualitative study of religiousness and spirituality among African American breast cancer survivors and their caregivers. Quality of Life Research, 23, 1909–1920.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Wee, H. L., Li, S. C., Xie, F., Zhang, X. H., Luo, N., Feeny, D., et al. (2008). Validity, feasibility and acceptability of time trade-off and standard gamble assessments in health valuation studies: A study in a multiethnic Asian population in Singapore. Value in Health, 11, S3–S10.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
The impact of a belief in life after death on health-state preferences: True difference or artifact?
verfasst von
Michał Jakubczyk
Dominik Golicki
Maciej Niewada
Publikationsdatum
21.07.2016
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 12/2016
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1356-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2016

Quality of Life Research 12/2016 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

Asymmetric responsiveness of disability and health-related quality of life to improvement versus decline in Parkinson’s disease

OriginalPaper

Longitudinal assessment of health related quality of life of HIV infected patients treated for tuberculosis and HIV in a high burden setting

Review

Reporting and dealing with missing quality of life data in RCTs: has the picture changed in the last decade?

OriginalPaper

Associations between daily physical activity, handgrip strength, muscle mass, physical performance and quality of life in prefrail and frail community-dwelling older adults

OriginalPaper

Anthropometric measures change and quality of life in elderly people: a longitudinal population-based study in Southern Brazil

OriginalPaper

Health-related quality of life of among elders in rural China: the effect of widowhood