TY - JOUR
T1 - Application of generalizability theory confirmed lower reliability of the standard gamble than the feeling thermometer
AU - Schünemann, Holger J.
AU - Norman, Geoff
AU - Puhan, Milo A.
AU - Ståhl, Elisabeth
AU - Griffith, Lauren
AU - Heels-Ansdell, Diane
AU - Montori, Victor M.
AU - Wiklund, Ingela
AU - Goldstein, Roger
AU - Mador, M. Jeffery
AU - Guyatt, Gordon H.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by an unrestricted grant from AstraZeneca, Inc.
PY - 2007/12
Y1 - 2007/12
N2 - Objectives: Recent studies suggest that rating clinical marker states (CMS) does not improve the measurement properties of the standard gamble (SG) and only slightly improves those of the feeling thermometer (FT). The poor intrarater (test-retest) reliability of CMS may explain their meager performance. Further, lack of interrater reliability may compromise the use of CMS in interpreting health state ratings. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability of CMS ratings for the SG and the FT. Study Design and Setting: Two similar studies in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, n = 91) and in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD, n = 112) provided data for this analysis. Patients rated three different CMS (mild, moderate, and severe disease) twice several weeks apart. We used generalizability theory to calculate reliability coefficients. Results: Test-retest reliability for CMS ratings was higher for the FT compared to the SG (COPD: 0.86 vs. 0.67; GERD: 0.86 vs. 0.67). Interrater reliability was much higher for the FT compared to the SG (COPD: 0.78 vs. 0.46; GERD: 0.71 vs. 0.26). Conclusions: These results suggest that the markedly poorer reliability of CMS for the SG than the FT is driven largely by poor interrater reliability.
AB - Objectives: Recent studies suggest that rating clinical marker states (CMS) does not improve the measurement properties of the standard gamble (SG) and only slightly improves those of the feeling thermometer (FT). The poor intrarater (test-retest) reliability of CMS may explain their meager performance. Further, lack of interrater reliability may compromise the use of CMS in interpreting health state ratings. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability of CMS ratings for the SG and the FT. Study Design and Setting: Two similar studies in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, n = 91) and in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD, n = 112) provided data for this analysis. Patients rated three different CMS (mild, moderate, and severe disease) twice several weeks apart. We used generalizability theory to calculate reliability coefficients. Results: Test-retest reliability for CMS ratings was higher for the FT compared to the SG (COPD: 0.86 vs. 0.67; GERD: 0.86 vs. 0.67). Interrater reliability was much higher for the FT compared to the SG (COPD: 0.78 vs. 0.46; GERD: 0.71 vs. 0.26). Conclusions: These results suggest that the markedly poorer reliability of CMS for the SG than the FT is driven largely by poor interrater reliability.
KW - Preference-based instruments
KW - Reliability
KW - Standard gamble
KW - Utilities
KW - Visual analogue scale
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=36048988376&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=36048988376&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.010
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.010
M3 - Article
C2 - 17998080
AN - SCOPUS:36048988376
SN - 0895-4356
VL - 60
SP - 1256
EP - 1262
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
IS - 12
ER -