ReviewBMC health services research2014
Health state descriptions to elicit stroke values: do they reflect patient experience of stroke?
Review in BMC health services research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- "The stroke has already happened. You can't undo what has happened" emotions, coping, and adjustment in the experiences of southeast Asian people living with stroke - A qualitative study.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Clients and professionals elicit long-term care preferences by using 'What matters to me': A process evaluation in the Netherlands.Health & social care in the community · 2022Article
- Proposal for a Framework to Enable Elicitation of Preferences for Clients in Need of Long-Term Care.Patient preference and adherence · 2020Article
- PERSPECTIVES: Stroke survivors' views on the design of an early-phase cell therapy trial for patients with chronic ischaemic stroke.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019Article
- The impact of a belief in life after death on health-state preferences: True difference or artifact?Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo explore whether stroke health state descriptions used in preference elicitation studies reflect patients' experiences by comparing published descriptions with qualitative studies exploring patients' lived experience.
methodsTwo literature reviews were conducted: on stroke health state descriptions used in direct preference elicitation studies and the qualitative literature on patients' stroke experience. Content and comparative thematic analysis was used to identify characteristics of stroke experience in both types of study which were further mapped onto health related quality of life (HRQOL) domains relevant to stroke. Two authors reviewed the coded text, categories and domains.
resultsWe included 35 studies: seven direct preference elicitation studies and 28 qualitative studies on patients' experience. Fifteen coded categories were identified in the published health state descriptions and 29 in the qualitative studies. When mapped onto domains related to HRQOL, qualitative studies included a wider range of categories in every domain that were relevant to the patients' experience than health state descriptions.
conclusionsVariation exists in the content of health state descriptions for all levels of stroke severity, most critically with a major disjuncture between the content of descriptions and how stroke is experienced by patients. There is no systematic method for constructing the content/scope of health state descriptions for stroke, and the patient perspective is not incorporated, producing descriptions with major deficits in reflecting the lived experience of stroke, and raising serious questions about the values derived from such descriptions and conclusions based on these values.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.