alzhub.org
Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Home › Research › Disease mechanisms

Utility scores for chronic conditions in a community-dwelling population

Mittmann N, Trakas K, Risebrough N, Liu BA.. PharmacoEconomics, 1999-04-01

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Disease mechanisms

Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology

Objective The objective of this study was to determine utility scores for various chronic conditions. Design and setting This study is a descriptive analysis. Health Utilities Index (HUI) scores for 20 chronic conditions were examined from the National Population Health Survey (NPHS) from 1994 to 1995. Patients and participants 17,626 individuals were surveyed (54.3% women). Chronic conditions included: acne (requiring medication), Alzheimer's disease, arthritis/rheumatism, asthma, back problems excluding arthritis, chronic bronchitis or emphysema, cancer, cataracts, diabetes, epilepsy, food allergies, glaucoma, heart disease, high blood pressure, migraine headaches, other allergies, sinusitis, stroke, stomach/intestinal ulcers and urinary incontinence. Interventions Health Utilities Index-Mark III (HUI-Mark III) scores for patients with and without a NPHS-defined chronic condition were collected. Utility scores were examined according to age, gender and comorbidity. Main outcome measures and results 42.6% of individuals reported having no NPHS-defined chronic condition. The most commonly reported health conditions were allergies other than food (17.6%) and rheumatism/arthritis (16.5%). The mean HUI-Mark III scores for patients without a health state was 0.933 +/- 0.079. Individuals with Alzheimer's disease (0.580 +/- 0.263), stroke (0.676 +/- 0.230) and urinary incontinence (0.698 +/- 0.230) had the lowest overall HUI-Mark III scores. Utility scores decreased as age and as the number of comorbid conditions increased. Conclusions This study provides health economists, researchers and policy-makers with a reference for health utilities of various chronic conditions, different age groups, gender and comorbidities.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 52/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 4 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 30 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 52 of 100. Total 52 of 100.30 of the 58 points we could judge = 52 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (PharmacoEconomics)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 1999 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 4 / 4 17,626 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 10537955)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 30 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100.
Total 52 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Mittmann, N., Trakas, K., Risebrough, N., & Liu, B. A. (1999). Utility scores for chronic conditions in a community-dwelling population. PharmacoEconomics. https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199915040-00004

Vancouver

Mittmann N, Trakas K, Risebrough N, Liu BA. Utility scores for chronic conditions in a community-dwelling population. PharmacoEconomics. 1999. doi:10.2165/00019053-199915040-00004. PMID: 10537955.

BibTeX

@article{mittmann1999-10537955,
  author  = {Mittmann, N. and Trakas, K. and Risebrough, N. and Liu, B. A.},
  title   = {{Utility scores for chronic conditions in a community-dwelling population}},
  journal = {PharmacoEconomics},
  year    = {1999},
  doi     = {10.2165/00019053-199915040-00004},
  pmid    = {10537955},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199915040-00004}
}

Related studies in Disease mechanisms

Also tagged “deaths”

109 studies in the library carry the topic tag “deaths”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 109 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Disease mechanisms

See all studies in Disease mechanisms →