Cargando…
“It is not a scientific number it is just a feeling”: Populating a multi‐dimensional end‐of‐life decision framework using deliberative methods
The capability approach is potentially valuable for economic evaluation at the end of life because of its conceptualization of wellbeing as freedom and the potential for capturing outcomes for those at end of life and those close to persons at the end of life. For decision making, however, this info...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8129721/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33647181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.4239 |
_version_ | 1783694362240090112 |
---|---|
author | Coast, Joanna Bailey, Cara Canaway, Alastair Kinghorn, Philip |
author_facet | Coast, Joanna Bailey, Cara Canaway, Alastair Kinghorn, Philip |
author_sort | Coast, Joanna |
collection | PubMed |
description | The capability approach is potentially valuable for economic evaluation at the end of life because of its conceptualization of wellbeing as freedom and the potential for capturing outcomes for those at end of life and those close to persons at the end of life. For decision making, however, this information needs to be integrated into current evaluation paradigms. This research explored weights for an integrated economic evaluation framework using a deliberative approach. Twelve focus groups were held (38 members of the public, 29 “policy makers,” seven hospice volunteers); budget pie tasks were completed to generate weights. Constant comparison was used to analyze qualitative data, exploring principles behind individuals' weightings. Average weights elicited from members of the general population and policy makers for the importance that should be given to close persons (vs. patients) were very similar, at around 30%. A “sliding scale” of weights between health gain and the capability for a good death resulted from the policy maker and volunteer groups, with increasing weight given to the capability for a good death as the trajectory got closer to death. These weights can be used in developing a more comprehensive framework for economic evaluation at end of life. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8129721 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81297212021-05-21 “It is not a scientific number it is just a feeling”: Populating a multi‐dimensional end‐of‐life decision framework using deliberative methods Coast, Joanna Bailey, Cara Canaway, Alastair Kinghorn, Philip Health Econ Research Articles The capability approach is potentially valuable for economic evaluation at the end of life because of its conceptualization of wellbeing as freedom and the potential for capturing outcomes for those at end of life and those close to persons at the end of life. For decision making, however, this information needs to be integrated into current evaluation paradigms. This research explored weights for an integrated economic evaluation framework using a deliberative approach. Twelve focus groups were held (38 members of the public, 29 “policy makers,” seven hospice volunteers); budget pie tasks were completed to generate weights. Constant comparison was used to analyze qualitative data, exploring principles behind individuals' weightings. Average weights elicited from members of the general population and policy makers for the importance that should be given to close persons (vs. patients) were very similar, at around 30%. A “sliding scale” of weights between health gain and the capability for a good death resulted from the policy maker and volunteer groups, with increasing weight given to the capability for a good death as the trajectory got closer to death. These weights can be used in developing a more comprehensive framework for economic evaluation at end of life. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-03-01 2021-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8129721/ /pubmed/33647181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.4239 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Health Economics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Coast, Joanna Bailey, Cara Canaway, Alastair Kinghorn, Philip “It is not a scientific number it is just a feeling”: Populating a multi‐dimensional end‐of‐life decision framework using deliberative methods |
title | “It is not a scientific number it is just a feeling”: Populating a multi‐dimensional end‐of‐life decision framework using deliberative methods |
title_full | “It is not a scientific number it is just a feeling”: Populating a multi‐dimensional end‐of‐life decision framework using deliberative methods |
title_fullStr | “It is not a scientific number it is just a feeling”: Populating a multi‐dimensional end‐of‐life decision framework using deliberative methods |
title_full_unstemmed | “It is not a scientific number it is just a feeling”: Populating a multi‐dimensional end‐of‐life decision framework using deliberative methods |
title_short | “It is not a scientific number it is just a feeling”: Populating a multi‐dimensional end‐of‐life decision framework using deliberative methods |
title_sort | “it is not a scientific number it is just a feeling”: populating a multi‐dimensional end‐of‐life decision framework using deliberative methods |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8129721/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33647181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.4239 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT coastjoanna itisnotascientificnumberitisjustafeelingpopulatingamultidimensionalendoflifedecisionframeworkusingdeliberativemethods AT baileycara itisnotascientificnumberitisjustafeelingpopulatingamultidimensionalendoflifedecisionframeworkusingdeliberativemethods AT canawayalastair itisnotascientificnumberitisjustafeelingpopulatingamultidimensionalendoflifedecisionframeworkusingdeliberativemethods AT kinghornphilip itisnotascientificnumberitisjustafeelingpopulatingamultidimensionalendoflifedecisionframeworkusingdeliberativemethods |