Does mode of administration matter? Comparison of online and face-to-face administration of a time trade-off task

Norman, Richard; King, Madeleine; Clarke, D.M.; Viney, Rosalie; Cronin, Paula; Street, Deborah J.

doi:10.1007/s11136-010-9609-5

Cited by 81 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Using a computer to elicit values instead of face-to-face interviews also may impact the comparability of the values to previous studies [36]. A computer based TTO has been used in previous EQ-5D studies [29], but often at an interview where assistance is available and not via the web.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Canadian Valuation of EQ-5D Health States: Preliminary Value Set and Considerations for Future Valuation Studies

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe EQ-5D is a preference based instrument which provides a description of a respondent's health status, and an empirically derived value for that health state often from a representative sample of the general population. It is commonly used to derive Quality Adjusted Life Year calculations (QALY) in economic evaluations. However, values for health states have been found to differ between countries. The objective of this study was to develop a set of values for the EQ-5D health states for use in Canada.MethodsValues for 48 different EQ-5D health states were elicited using the Time Trade Off (TTO) via a web survey in English. A random effect model was fitted to the data to estimate values for all 243 health states of the EQ-5D. Various model specifications were explored. Comparisons with EQ-5D values from the UK and US were made. Sensitivity analysis explored different transformations of values worse than dead, and exclusion criteria of subjects.ResultsThe final model was estimated from the values of 1145 subjects with socio-demographics broadly representative of Canadian general population with the exception of Quebec. This yielded a good fit with observed TTO values, with an overall R2 of 0.403 and a mean absolute error of 0.044.ConclusionA preference-weight algorithm for Canadian studies that include the EQ-5D is developed. The primary limitations regarded the representativeness of the final sample, given the language used (English only), the method of recruitment, and the difficulty in the task. Insights into potential issues for conducting valuation studies in countries as large and diverse as Canada are gained.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Canadian Valuation of EQ-5D Health States: Preliminary Value Set and Considerations for Future Valuation Studies

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…22 A comparison of the online and face-to-face delivery of TTO found that the responses differed by administration mode, with the online sample displaying more variation in response. 31 Tests of the person trade-off (PTO) valuation technique across online and CAPI administrations also found potential differences across modes. 32,33 Therefore, iterative health-state valuation tasks administered online may generate different results from face-to-face studies, but it is not clear whether the difference comes from the mode of administration or an interaction between the iterative task and the mode of administration.…”

Section: What Mode Of Administration?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparatory study for the revaluation of the EQ-5D tariff: methodology report

Mulhern

Bansback

Brazier

et al. 2014

Health Technology Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…After the task began, there was no interaction between the four respondents, and the trained interviewer was instructed to only assist with matters of interpretation of the question, and any technology issues. The reason for using this electronic approach relative to a straightforward online survey was that recent evidence has suggested that results generated using that latter approach may produce large numbers of health state valuations clustered around -1, 0, and 1 [24]. Each respondent was paid $60 for completion of the survey.…”

Section: Recruitment and Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%