Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T08:21:03.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Outcome Measurements in Decision Analysis: Life Versus Quality of Life

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2016

Mary D. Nettleman
Mary D. Nettleman*
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Clinical Epidemiology, The University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
*
Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Clinical Epidemiology, The University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA 52242
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Life expectancy has been the most popular outcome measurement for decision analyses. The effectiveness, or utility, of a strategy is expressed in years of life gained over a baseline state. This is particularly useful from a public health standpoint when a fixed budget must be used to serve a diverse population. For example, should money be spent on influenza vaccination programs or cholesterol screening? A decision analysis to answer this question might use cost per year of life gained as the primary outcome. Essentially, the public health provider is seeking to minimize cost while maximizing life expectancy. Strategies could be ordered and priority given according to rank.

Type
Special Sections
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 10 , Issue 11 , November 1989 , pp. 521 - 524
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Beck, JR. Kassirer, JPT Pauker, SG, A convenient approximation of life expectancy (the “DEALE”), 1: validation of the method. Am J Med. 1982;73:883–888,CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Beck, JR, Pauker, SG, A convenient approximation of life expectancy (the “DEALE”), II: use in medical decision making. Am J Med. 1982;73:889.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Gompertz, B. On the nature of the function expressive of the law of human mortality. Philos Trans R Soc bond. 1825;115:513–585,Google Scholar
4. Nettleman, MD. The effectiveness of medical care. Infection Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1988;9:510–511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Beck, JR, Pauker, SG. The Markov process in medical prognosis. Med Decis Making. 1985;5:215–228.Google Scholar
6. Kassirer, JP. Adding insult to injury: usurping patients' perogatives. N Engl J Med. 1983;308:898–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Sox, HC, Blatt, MA, Higgins, MC, Marton, KI, eds. Medical Decision Making. Boston, Mass: Butterworths Press;1988.Google Scholar
8. Sackett, DL, Torrance, GW, The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public. Journal of Chronic Disease. 1978;31:697–704 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Nettleman, MD. Decision analysis: a tool for infection control. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1988;9:88–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed