Retrospective evaluation versus population norms for the measurement of baseline health status

Wilson, Ross; Derrett, Sarah; Hansen, Paul; Langley, John Desmond

doi:10.1186/1477-7525-10-68

Cited by 60 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, the severity of anatomical injury (a measure of threat to life) may simply be insufficient as a predictor of wellbeing among those who survive an injury event (van Delft-Schreurs et al, 2014). Elsewhere, we have reported the severity of anatomical injury does not necessarily predict disability burden among survivors of injury events Wilson et al, 2012). A further reason suggested by Jones and colleagues (2011) is that more severely injured individuals receive higher levels of services and support that limit the negative effects of injury severity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A further limitation could be a bias in participants' over-rating their pre-injury health status. However, such bias in our cohort was analysed by Wilson et al (2012), who reported that although there was over-rating of pre-injury status, this appears to be minimal. Finally, the majority of participants were in paid employment at the time of their injury, therefore findings cannot be generalised to retired populations or to those not in paid employment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…"The next statements relate to intellectual activities such as remembering, concentrating, thinking and solving day to day problems" Participants were also asked at this interview to recall their pre-injury EQ-5D status on the same six dimensions (Wilson, Derrett, Hansen, & Langley, 2012).…”

Section: Self-reported Health Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Injury characteristics and EQ-5D as predictors of personal wellbeing after injury

McAllister¹,

Derrett²,

Davie³

et al. 2014

Intnl. J. Wellbeing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Objective: A longitudinal study examined the relationships of injury severity, whether the injury was accidental or was caused by an assault, and self-reported EQ-5D soon after injury, with long-term personal wellbeing among participants with a range of injury types and severity.Methods: Interviews with participants recruited in the Prospective Outcomes of Injury Study (POIS) were conducted up to four time points in the 24 months after injury. Key explanatory variables were New Injury Severity Score (NISS), whether the injury was accidental or resulted from assault, and self-reported health status (five EQ-5D questions and a similar question about cognition) reported at three months. The main outcome measure at 24 months was the Personal Wellbeing Index (PWI) (PWI <70='low' wellbeing). Univariate and multivariable analyses examined relationships between explanatory variables and low PWI.Results: Even in a group of people with injuries traditionally regarded as being of mild or moderate anatomical severity, wellbeing continues to be affected for an appreciable time post-injury, with a quarter (27%) of study participants having a low level of personal wellbeing 24 months after their injury. Neither anatomical injury severity nor hospitalisation were predictive of low personal wellbeing. An increased risk of low personal wellbeing was observed in participants whose injury was caused by an intentional assault (rather than accident), and in those who reported problems three months post-injury with EQ-5D self-care, anxiety/depression or cognitive functioning. Conclusions:Identification of such individuals early after an injury is of particular importance and ensuring adequate support services are put in place that encourage re-integration back into work and social networks could help prevent on-going poor wellbeing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Injury characteristics and EQ-5D as predictors of personal wellbeing after injury

McAllister¹,

Derrett²,

Davie³

et al. 2014

Intnl. J. Wellbeing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wilson and colleagues [46] compared the use of retrospective recall of baseline health status versus population norms (New Zealand) in estimating change in health state valuations following acute-onset illness or injury. Their findings indicate a small but significant difference between pre-and post-injury health-related quality of life for people who had fully recovered, with recalled pre-injury health-related quality of life being higher than reported post-injury health.…”

Section: Retrospective Recall Of the Baseline Health-related Quality mentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodological Issues Surrounding the Use of Baseline Health-Related Quality of Life Data to Inform Trial-Based Economic Evaluations of Interventions Within Emergency and Critical Care Settings: A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

warwick.ac.uk/lib-publicationsOriginal citation: Dritsaki, Melina, Achana, Felix A., Mason, James and Petrou, Stavros. (2017) Methodological issues surrounding the use of baseline health-related quality of life data to inform trial-based economic evaluations of interventions within emergency and critical care settings : a systematic literature review. PharmacoEconomics. Permanent WRAP URL:http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/85039 Copyright and reuse:The Warwick Research Archive Portal (WRAP) makes this work by researchers of the University of Warwick available open access under the following conditions. Copyright © and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable the material made available in WRAP has been checked for eligibility before being made available.Copies of full items can be used for personal research or study, educational, or not-for profit purposes without prior permission or charge. Provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. Publisher's statement:"The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-016-0485-x " A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRAP url' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. Results: A total of 4224 published reports were screened, 19 of which met the study inclusion criteria (mean trial size 1,670); 14 (74 %) from the UK, 4 (21%) from other European countries and 1 (5%) from India. Twelve studies (63%) were based in emergency departments and 7 (37%) in intensive care units. Only one study was able to elicit patient-reported health-related quality of life at baseline. To overcome the lack of baseline data when estimating QALYs, 8 (42%) studies assigned a fixed utility weight corresponding to either death, an unconscious health state or a country-specific norm to patients at baseline, 4 (21%) ignored baseline utilities, 3 (16%) applied values from another study, 1 (5%) generated utility values via retrospective recall and 1 (5%) elicited utilities from experts. A preliminary exploration of these methods shows that incremental QALY estimation is unlikely to be biased if balanced trial allocation is achieved and subsequent collection of health-related quality of life data occurs at the earliest possible opportunity following commencement of treatment followed by adequate number of follow-up assessments. Conclusion:Trial-based cost-utility analyses within emergency and critical illness settings have applied different methods for QALY estimation, employing disparate assumptions about the health-related quality of life of patients at baseline. Where baseline measurem...

show abstract

“…Also, many of the pre-injury variables adjusted for are not subjective, and analysis of data from POIS examining recall bias for the EQ-5D health status measure suggests that any recall bias is, at-worst, mild. 44 Although 239 Pacific peoples were recruited to POIS, the study may also be underpowered to detect differences in relative risks of certain outcomes where in truth such differences exist. It is important to note that the comparison group includes all non-Pacific participants, including a greater proportion of people also reporting Māori ethnicity (15% of Pacific peoples reported Māori ethnicity; compared to 20% of non-Pacific people).…”

Section: Study Limitations and Strengthsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pacific peoples three months after injury: a comparison of outcomes between Pacific and non‐Pacific participants in a NZ cohort study

Mauiliu

Derrett

Samaranayaka

et al. 2013

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retrospective evaluation versus population norms for the measurement of baseline health status

Cited by 60 publications

References 13 publications

Injury characteristics and EQ-5D as predictors of personal wellbeing after injury

Injury characteristics and EQ-5D as predictors of personal wellbeing after injury

Methodological Issues Surrounding the Use of Baseline Health-Related Quality of Life Data to Inform Trial-Based Economic Evaluations of Interventions Within Emergency and Critical Care Settings: A Systematic Literature Review

Pacific peoples three months after injury: a comparison of outcomes between Pacific and non‐Pacific participants in a NZ cohort study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About