Standardization and regulatory guidelines may inhibit science and reduce the usefulness of analyses based on the application of preference-based measures for policy decisions.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

1. The time horizon matters: results of an exploratory study varying the timeframe in time trade-off and standard gamble utility elicitation.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2016
   Article
2. Valuation of Child Behavioral Problems from the Perspective of US Adults.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2016
   Article
3. Health Condition Impacts in a Nationally Representative Cross-Sectional Survey Vary Substantially by Preference-Based Health Index.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2016
   Article
4. The Value Adults Place on Child Health and Functional Status.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2015
   Article
5. Estimates of utility weights in hemophilia: implications for cost-utility analysis of clotting factor prophylaxis.Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research · 2015
   Review
6. Health state descriptions to elicit stroke values: do they reflect patient experience of stroke?BMC health services research · 2014
   Review
7. Demographic differences in health preferences in the United States.Medical care · 2014
   Article
8. When there is Confusion and Conflicts - Ask Delphi!Journal of neonatal surgery
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Estimating a preference-based index from the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measure (CORE-OM): valuation of CORE-6D.2013

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as