The Use of Confidence Intervals for Individual Utilities:

This paper discusses the use of confidence intervals for utility measurements. Classic test theory is applied to estimate confidence intervals for utilities. The theory is enhanced to calculate confidence areas for combined utilities and confidence bands for the threshold line. As an example it is shown that, if confidence intervals are taken into account, the implied preferred treatment of T3-larynx carcinoma patients is uncertain for a wide range of utilities, considering the mediocre reliability of most methods of utility assessment. This implies that although utility measurement and formal decision analysis can be a useful way to look at the decision problem, ambiguity, which must be resolved by other means, will often remain. Key words: utility theory; utility measurement; confidence intervals. (Med Decis Making 1997;17:285-291)

[1]  J. Habbema,et al.  Patient participation in clinical decision-making for treatment of T3 laryngeal cancer: a comparison of state and process utilities. , 1995, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[2]  A. Stiggelbout,et al.  Test-Retest Reliabilities of Two Treatment-preference Instruments in Measuring Utilities , 1993, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[3]  W. Edwards.  Utility Theories: Measurements and Applications , 1992 .

[4]  E. Nord,et al.  Methods for quality adjustment of life years. , 1992, Social science & medicine.

[5]  N. Boyd,et al.  Whose Utilities for Decision Analysis? , 1990, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[6]  P. Vlasses.  Medical Decision Making , 1990 .

[7]  K E Willard,et al.  Probabilistic Analysis of Decision Trees Using Monte Carlo Simulation , 1986, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[8]  H. Fineberg,et al.  Preferences for Health Outcomes , 1984, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[9]  George W. Torrance,et al.  Application of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory to Measure Social Preferences for Health States , 1982, Oper. Res..

[10]  B. McNeil,et al.  Speech and survival: tradeoffs between quality and quantity of life in laryngeal cancer. , 1981, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  G. W. Fischer,et al.  Convergent validation of decomposed multi-attribute utility assessment procedures for risky and riskless decisions , 1977 .

[12]  L. Stalpers.  Clinical decision making in oncology: with special reference to patients with cancer of the head and neck , 1991 .

[13]  G W Torrance,et al.  Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life. , 1987, Journal of chronic diseases.

[14]  N F Boyd,et al.  Eliciting preferences for alternative drug therapies in oncology: influence of treatment outcome description, elicitation technique and treatment experience on preferences. , 1987, Journal of chronic diseases.

[15]  H A Llewellyn-Thomas,et al.  The assessment of values in laryngeal cancer: reliability of measurement methods. , 1984, Journal of chronic diseases.

[16]  J. Nunnally.  Psychometric Theory (2nd ed), New York: McGraw-Hill. , 1978 .

[17]  George W. Torrance,et al.  Social preferences for health states: An empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques , 1976 .