<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Lakerveld, J.</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/48642/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Consumer preferences for health and nonhealth outcomes of health promotion: Results from a discrete choice experiment (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/38722/</link>
      <pubDate>2013-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Objective: Health promotion (HP) interventions have outcomes that go beyond health. Such broader nonhealth outcomes are usually neglected in economic evaluation studies. To allow for their consideration, insights are needed into the types of nonhealth outcomes that HP interventions produce and their relative importance compared with health outcomes. This study explored consumer preferences for health and nonhealth outcomes of HP in the context of lifestyle behavior change. Methods: A discrete choice experiment was conducted among participants in a lifestyle intervention (n = 132) and controls (n = 141). Respondents made 16 binary choices between situations that can be experienced after lifestyle behavior change. The situations were described by 10 attributes: future health state value, start point of future health state, life expectancy, clothing size above ideal, days with sufficient relaxation, endurance, experienced control over lifestyle choices, lifestyle improvement of partner and/or children, monetary cost per month, and time cost per week. Results: With the exception of time cost per week and start point of future health state, all attributes significantly determined consumer choices. Thus, both health and nonhealth outcomes affected consumer choice. Marginal rates of substitution between the price attribute and the other attributes revealed that the attributes endurance, days with sufficient relaxation, and future health state value had the greatest impact on consumer choices. The life expectancy attribute had a relatively low impact and for increases of less than 3 years, respondents were not willing to trade. Conclusions: Health outcomes and nonhealth outcomes of lifestyle behavior change were both important to consumers in this study. Decision makers should respond to consumer preferences and consider nonhealth outcomes when deciding about HP interventions. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Exploring non-health outcomes of health promotion: The perspective of participants in a lifestyle behaviour change intervention (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/32899/</link>
      <pubDate>2012-07-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Objective: To provide insights into health promotion outcomes that are not captured by conventional measures of health outcome used in economic evaluation studies, such as EQ5D based QALYs. Methods: Twelve semi-structured interviews and five focus group discussions were conducted with participants of a randomized controlled trial (n= 52) evaluating the effectiveness of a theory-based lifestyle intervention in Dutch adults at risk for diabetes mellitus and/or cardiovascular disease. Transcripts were analysed by two independent researchers using a thematic analysis approach. Results: In total we identified twelve non-health outcome themes that were important from the participant perspective. Four of these were reported as direct outcomes of the lifestyle intervention and eight were reported as consequences of lifestyle behaviour change. Our findings also suggest that lifestyle behaviour change may have spillover effects to other people in the participants' direct environment. Conclusion: This study provides evidence that in the context of lifestyle behaviour change EQ5D based QALYs capture health promotion outcomes only partially. More insights are needed into non-health outcomes and spillover effects produced by health promotion in other contexts and how participants and society value these. Methods to account for these outcomes within an economic evaluation framework need to be developed and tested. </description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>