Carer social care-related quality of life outcomes: Carer social care-related quality of life outcomes: estimating English preference weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers (ASCOT-Carer)
Carer social care-related quality of life outcomes: Carer social care-related quality of life outcomes: estimating English preference weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers (ASCOT-Carer)
复制标题
护理者社会护理相关的生活质量结果：护理者社会护理相关的生活质量结果：估计护理者成人社会护理结果工具包 (ASCOT-Carer) 的英语偏好权重
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Forder
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Batchelder;Juliette Malley;P. Burge;Hui Lu;E. Saloniki;I. Linnosmaa;J. Forder
目的：评估英国普通人群非正式照护者社会照护相关生活质量（SCRQoL）的英语版本ASCOT-Carer的偏好指数。方法：scqol由7个领域组成，每个领域反映非正式照顾者scqol的各个方面。对ASCOT-Carer scqol状态的偏好在在线调查中使用最佳最差评分练习（BWS）进行估计。这项调查是对英国普通成年人进行的抽样调查（n= 1000）。参与者被要求将自己置于非正式照顾者的假设状态，并从反映七个领域的七个属性的个人资料列表中指出他们认为哪个属性是最好的（第一和第二）和最差的（第一和第二），每个属性都在不同的级别（1-4）。使用多项逻辑回归分析数据并估计ASCOT-Carer测量的偏好权重。结果：英语被试对“职业”属性的评价最高。结果进一步显示，参与者认为“无法控制自己的日常生活”是所有人的最低属性水平。这七个属性的位置影响了参与者的最佳和最差选择，有证据表明，在偏好上，规模和口味都存在异质性。结论：本研究为英国的ASCOT-Carer建立了一套基于偏好的指数值，该指数值来源于BWS练习，可用于对老年人及其非正式照顾者的干预措施进行经济评估。
Objective: To estimate preference-based index values for the English version of the ASCOT-Carer, a measure assessing social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) in informal carers, from the general population in England. Methods: The ASCOT-Carer consists of seven domains, each reflecting aspects of SCRQoL in informal carers. Preferences for the ASCOT-Carer SCRQoL states were estimated using a Best-Worst Scaling exercise (BWS) in an online survey. The survey was administered to a sample of the general adult population in England (n=1,000). Participants were asked to put themselves into the hypothetical state of being an informal carer and indicate which attribute they thought was the best (first and second) and worst (first and second) from a profile list of seven attributes reflecting the seven domains, each ranging at a different level (1-4). Multinomial logistic regression was used to analyse the data and estimate preference weights for the ASCOT-Carer measure. Results: The most valued aspect by English participants was the ‘occupation’ attribute at its highest level. Results further showed participants rated having ‘no control over their daily life’ as the lowest attribute-level of all those presented. The position of the seven attributes influenced participants’ best and worst choices, and there was evidence of both scale and taste heterogeneity on preferences. Conclusions: This study has established a set of preference-based index values for the ASCOT-Carer in England derived from the BWS exercise that can be used for economic evaluation of interventions on older individuals and their informal carers.