Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S4142
DC FieldValue
dc.titleAre symbols useful and culturally acceptable in health-state valuation studies? An exploratory study in a multi-ethnic Asian population
dc.contributor.authorWee, H.-L.
dc.contributor.authorLi, S.-C.
dc.contributor.authorZhang, X.-H.
dc.contributor.authorXie, F.
dc.contributor.authorFeeny, D.
dc.contributor.authorLuo, N.
dc.contributor.authorCheung, Y.-B.
dc.contributor.authorMachin, D.
dc.contributor.authorFong, K.-Y.
dc.contributor.authorThumboo, J.
dc.date.accessioned2014-11-25T09:43:54Z
dc.date.available2014-11-25T09:43:54Z
dc.date.issued2008-10-02
dc.identifier.citationWee, H.-L., Li, S.-C., Zhang, X.-H., Xie, F., Feeny, D., Luo, N., Cheung, Y.-B., Machin, D., Fong, K.-Y., Thumboo, J. (2008-10-02). Are symbols useful and culturally acceptable in health-state valuation studies? An exploratory study in a multi-ethnic Asian population. Patient Preference and Adherence 2 : 271-276. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S4142
dc.identifier.issn1177889X
dc.identifier.urihttp://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/108264
dc.description.abstractBackground: Symbols have been used in health state valuation studies to help subjects distinguish the severity of various characteristics of a given health state. Symbols used in such studies need to be evaluated for their cross-cultural appropriateness because a given symbol may have different meanings or acceptability in different cultures, which may affect results of such studies. Objectives: To evaluate if using symbols to differentiate health states of different severity is useful and culturally acceptable in a multi-ethnic, urban Asian population. Methods: Using in-depth interviews with adult Chinese, Malay, and Indian Singaporeans conducted in English/mother-tongue, subjects were shown a health state with 6 levels (Health Utilities Index 3 vision), each displayed with a symbol, and asked (1a) if symbols were useful in differentiating severity of each level (measured using dichotomous and 0-10 visual analog scale [VAS] scales) or (1b) offensive and (2) to assess 7 alternative sets of symbols. Results: Of 63 subjects (91% response rate), 18 (29%) felt symbols were useful in differentiating severity of each level. Reported usefulness of symbols was fair (median VAS score: 3.0, score exceeding 5.0 for 33% of subjects). One Malay subject felt symbols were offensive. Conclusions: Use of symbols for health state valuation was culturally acceptable and useful for some subjects. © 2008 Wee et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd.
dc.description.urihttp://libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S4142
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectAsian
dc.subjectCulture
dc.subjectHealth status
dc.subjectQuestionnaires
dc.subjectSingapore
dc.subjectSoutheastern
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentCOMMUNITY,OCCUPATIONAL & FAMILY MEDICINE
dc.contributor.departmentPHARMACY
dc.description.doi10.2147/PPA.S4142
dc.description.sourcetitlePatient Preference and Adherence
dc.description.volume2
dc.description.page271-276
dc.identifier.isiutNOT_IN_WOS
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
2008-are_symbols_useful_culturally_acceptable-pub.pdf128.79 kBAdobe PDF

OPEN

PublishedView/Download

Page view(s)

89
checked on Jul 5, 2019

Download(s)

4
checked on Jul 5, 2019

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.