Literature DB >> 12102695

A comparison of methods for analyzing health-related quality-of-life measures.

Peter C Austin1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Self-reported health status is often measured using psychometric or utility indices that provide a score intended to summarize an individual's health. Measurements of health status can be subject to a ceiling effect. Frequently, researchers want to examine relationships between determinants of health and measures of health status. Regression methods that ignore the censoring in the health status measurement can produce biased coefficient estimates. The authors examine the performance of three different models for assessing the relationship between demographic characteristics and health status.
METHODS: Three methods that allow one to analyze data subject to a ceiling effect are compared. The first model is the classic Tobit model. The second and third models are robust variants of the Tobit model: symmetrically trimmed least squares and censored least absolute deviations (Censored LAD) regression. These models were fit to data from the Canadian National Population Health Survey. The results are compared to three models that ignore the presence of a ceiling effect.
RESULTS: The Censored LAD model produced coefficient estimates that tended to be shrunk toward 0, compared to the other two models. The three models produced conflicting evidence on the effect of gender on health status. Similarly, the rate of decay in health status with increasing age differed across the three models. The Censored LAD model produced results very similar to median regression. Furthermore, the censored LAD model had the lowest prediction error in an independent validation dataset.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the need for careful consideration about how best to model variation in health status. Based upon our study, we recommend the use of Censored LAD regression.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12102695     DOI: 10.1046/j.1524-4733.2002.54128.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  33 in total

1.  Improving the mapping of condition-specific health-related quality of life onto SF-6D score.

Authors:  Yingsi Yang; M Y Wong; Cindy L K Lam; Carlos K H Wong
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-03-29       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Regression estimators for generic health-related quality of life and quality-adjusted life years.

Authors:  Anirban Basu; Andrea Manca
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 2.583

3.  Understanding the determinants of health for people with type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Sheri L Maddigan; David H Feeny; Sumit R Majumdar; Karen B Farris; Jeffrey A Johnson
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2006-07-27       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Mapping the EQ-5D index from the SF-12: US general population preferences in a nationally representative sample.

Authors:  Patrick W Sullivan; Vahram Ghushchyan
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  The impact of 29 chronic conditions on health-related quality of life: a general population survey in Finland using 15D and EQ-5D.

Authors:  Samuli I Saarni; Tommi Härkänen; Harri Sintonen; Jaana Suvisaari; Seppo Koskinen; Arpo Aromaa; Jouko Lönnqvist
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-09-08       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Constructing indirect utility models: some observations on the principles and practice of mapping to obtain health state utilities.

Authors:  Christopher McCabe; Richard Edlin; David Meads; Chantelle Brown; Samer Kharroubi
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Predicting EQ-5D utility scores from the 25-item National Eye Institute Vision Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ 25) in patients with age-related macular degeneration.

Authors:  Nalin Payakachat; Kent H Summers; Andreas M Pleil; Matthew M Murawski; Joseph Thomas; Kristofer Jennings; James G Anderson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-06-19       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Individual health discount rate in patients with ulcerative colitis.

Authors:  Akbar K Waljee; Arden M Morris; Jennifer F Waljee; Peter D R Higgins
Journal:  Inflamm Bowel Dis       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 5.325

9.  The impact of new screen-detected and previously known type 2 diabetes on health-related quality of life: a population-based study in Qingdao, China.

Authors:  Yanlei Zhang; Jianping Sun; Zengchang Pang; Xiaoyong Wang; Weiguo Gao; Feng Ning; Jie Ren; Anil Kapur; Harri Sintonen; Qing Qiao
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Addressing ceiling effects in health status measures: a comparison of techniques applied to measures for people with HIV disease.

Authors:  I-Chan Huang; Constantine Frangakis; Mark J Atkinson; Richard J Willke; Walter L Leite; W Bruce Vogel; Albert W Wu
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 3.402

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.