The visual analog rating scale of health-related quality of life: an examination of end-digit preferences

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Amir Shmueli¹ 

[1] Department of Health Management, The Hebrew University, POB 12272 Jerusalem, Israel

关键词: Health-Related Quality of Life;    End-digit preference;    Visual Analog Scale;   

Others  :  1219252
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7525-3-71

 received in 2005-09-19, accepted in 2005-11-14,  发布年份 2005

【 摘 要 】

Background

The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) has been extensively used in the valuation of health-related quality of life (HRQL). The objective of this paper is to examine the measurement error (rounding) explanation for the higher prevalence of VAS scores ending with a zero, and to provide an alternative interpretation.

Methods

The analysis is based on more than 4,500 reported VAS valuations of own HRQL, included in two Israeli health surveys (1993 and 2000). Bivariate and logistic regression analyses are used.

Results

The results show that reporting VAS scores ending with a 0 (...-20, ..0,10,20.....) decreases and scores ending with a 5 (...-15,-5,5,15,25,...) and with any other integer (...-12, -11,...1,2,...,92,..99) increases as VAS scores depart from 50, particularly when increasing up to 100. This pattern remains after controlling for personal characteristics determining the level of VAS.

Discussion

Rounding true HRQL to the nearest 10's or 5's cannot explain the specific pattern found. It is suggested that this pattern corresponds to a S-shaped value function, where individuals tend to evaluate their HRQL as "gains" or "losses" relative to a reference point evaluated at 50. This particular reference score originates from being a traditional "passing threshold" and the scale's midpoint. Several implications of this interpretation to the measurement of HRQL are discussed.

【 授权许可】

   
2005 Shmueli; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Torrance GW: Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socio-Economic Planning Sci 1978, 10:129-138.
• [2]Bleichrodt H, Johannesson M: An experimental test of a theoretical foundation for rating scale valuations. Med Decis Making 1997, 17:208-216.
• [3]Lundberg L, Johannesson M, Isacson DGL, Borgquist L: Health state utilities in a general population in relation to age, gender and socioeconomic factors. Eur J Pub Health 1999, 9:211-217.
• [4]Shmueli A: Subjective health status and health values in the general population. Med Decis Making 1999, 19:122-127.
• [5]EuroQol – A new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group Health Policy 1990, 16:199-208.
• [6]Robinson A, Loomes G, Jones-Lee M: Visual analog scales, standard gambling and relative risk aversion. Med Decis Making 2001, 21:17-27.
• [7]Torrance GW, Feeny D, Furlong W: Visual Analog Scales: Do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states? Med Decis Making 2001, 21:329-334.
• [8]Denic S, Khatib F, Saadi H: Quality of age data in patients from developing countries. J Public Health 2004, 26:168-171.
• [9]De Lusignan S, Belsley J, Hague N, Dzregah B: End-digit preference in blood pressure recordings of patients with ischemic heart disease in primary care. J Hum Hypertens 2004, 18:261-265.
• [10]Shmueli A: Israelis evaluate their health care system before and after the introduction of the National Health Insurance Law. Health Policy 2003, 63:279-287.
• [11]Kahnemann D, Tversky A: Prospect theory: an analysis of decision making under risk. Econometrica 1979, 47:263-291.
• [12]Stevens SS: Issues in psychophysical measurement. Psychological Review 1971, 78:426-450.