{"title":"得出荷兰的残疾权重:荷兰残疾权重测量研究的结果。","authors":"Juanita A Haagsma, Periklis Charalampous","doi":"10.1186/s12963-024-00342-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aims of this study were to establish national disability weights based on the health state preferences of a Dutch general population sample, examine the relation between results and respondent's characteristics, and compare disability weights with those estimated in the European disability weights study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, a web-based survey was administered to a general population 18-75 years from the Netherlands. The survey included paired comparison questions. Paired comparison data were analysed using probit regression and located results onto the 0-to-1 disability weight scale using non-parametric regression. Bootstrapping was used to estimate 95% uncertainty intervals (95%UI). Spearman's correlation was used to investigate the relation of probit regression coefficients between respondent's characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>3994 respondents completed the questionnaire. The disability weights ranged from 0.007 (95%UI: 0.003-0.012) for mild distance vision impairment to 0.741 (95% UI: 0.498-0.924) for intensive care unit admission. Spearman's correlation of probit coefficients between sub-groups based on respondent's characteristics were all above 0.95 (p < 0.001). Comparison of disability weights of 140 health states that were included in the Dutch and European disability weights study showed a high correlation (Spearman's correlation: 0.942; p < 0.001); however, for 76 (54.3%) health states the point estimate of the Dutch disability weight fell outside of the 95%UI of the European disability weights.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Respondent's characteristics had no influence on health state valuations with the paired comparison. However, comparison of the Dutch disability weights to the European disability weights indicates that health state preferences of the general population of the Netherlands differ from those of other European countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":51476,"journal":{"name":"Population Health Metrics","volume":"22 1","pages":"26"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11457395/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deriving disability weights for the Netherlands: findings from the Dutch disability weights measurement study.\",\"authors\":\"Juanita A Haagsma, Periklis Charalampous\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12963-024-00342-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aims of this study were to establish national disability weights based on the health state preferences of a Dutch general population sample, examine the relation between results and respondent's characteristics, and compare disability weights with those estimated in the European disability weights study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, a web-based survey was administered to a general population 18-75 years from the Netherlands. The survey included paired comparison questions. Paired comparison data were analysed using probit regression and located results onto the 0-to-1 disability weight scale using non-parametric regression. Bootstrapping was used to estimate 95% uncertainty intervals (95%UI). Spearman's correlation was used to investigate the relation of probit regression coefficients between respondent's characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>3994 respondents completed the questionnaire. The disability weights ranged from 0.007 (95%UI: 0.003-0.012) for mild distance vision impairment to 0.741 (95% UI: 0.498-0.924) for intensive care unit admission. Spearman's correlation of probit coefficients between sub-groups based on respondent's characteristics were all above 0.95 (p < 0.001). Comparison of disability weights of 140 health states that were included in the Dutch and European disability weights study showed a high correlation (Spearman's correlation: 0.942; p < 0.001); however, for 76 (54.3%) health states the point estimate of the Dutch disability weight fell outside of the 95%UI of the European disability weights.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Respondent's characteristics had no influence on health state valuations with the paired comparison. However, comparison of the Dutch disability weights to the European disability weights indicates that health state preferences of the general population of the Netherlands differ from those of other European countries.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Population Health Metrics\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"26\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11457395/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Population Health Metrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-024-00342-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Population Health Metrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-024-00342-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Deriving disability weights for the Netherlands: findings from the Dutch disability weights measurement study.
Background: The aims of this study were to establish national disability weights based on the health state preferences of a Dutch general population sample, examine the relation between results and respondent's characteristics, and compare disability weights with those estimated in the European disability weights study.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, a web-based survey was administered to a general population 18-75 years from the Netherlands. The survey included paired comparison questions. Paired comparison data were analysed using probit regression and located results onto the 0-to-1 disability weight scale using non-parametric regression. Bootstrapping was used to estimate 95% uncertainty intervals (95%UI). Spearman's correlation was used to investigate the relation of probit regression coefficients between respondent's characteristics.
Results: 3994 respondents completed the questionnaire. The disability weights ranged from 0.007 (95%UI: 0.003-0.012) for mild distance vision impairment to 0.741 (95% UI: 0.498-0.924) for intensive care unit admission. Spearman's correlation of probit coefficients between sub-groups based on respondent's characteristics were all above 0.95 (p < 0.001). Comparison of disability weights of 140 health states that were included in the Dutch and European disability weights study showed a high correlation (Spearman's correlation: 0.942; p < 0.001); however, for 76 (54.3%) health states the point estimate of the Dutch disability weight fell outside of the 95%UI of the European disability weights.
Conclusions: Respondent's characteristics had no influence on health state valuations with the paired comparison. However, comparison of the Dutch disability weights to the European disability weights indicates that health state preferences of the general population of the Netherlands differ from those of other European countries.
期刊介绍:
Population Health Metrics aims to advance the science of population health assessment, and welcomes papers relating to concepts, methods, ethics, applications, and summary measures of population health. The journal provides a unique platform for population health researchers to share their findings with the global community. We seek research that addresses the communication of population health measures and policy implications to stakeholders; this includes papers related to burden estimation and risk assessment, and research addressing population health across the full range of development. Population Health Metrics covers a broad range of topics encompassing health state measurement and valuation, summary measures of population health, descriptive epidemiology at the population level, burden of disease and injury analysis, disease and risk factor modeling for populations, and comparative assessment of risks to health at the population level. The journal is also interested in how to use and communicate indicators of population health to reduce disease burden, and the approaches for translating from indicators of population health to health-advancing actions. As a cross-cutting topic of importance, we are particularly interested in inequalities in population health and their measurement.