Comparison of valuation methods used to generate the EQ-5D and the SF-6D value sets.

An interview study with 101 members of public compared the protocols used in valuation studies for EQ-5D (using ranking, visual analogue scale, and time trade-off), and SF-6D (using ranking and standard gamble). Respondents were given one of the two protocols and asked to value four states each from EQ-5D and SF-6D. VAS scores suggest the narrower range of SF-6D values is partly attributable to the descriptive system; TTO values for milder states were higher than SG values; and the mean value for EQ-5D pits using TTO and SF-6D pits using SG were closer than across the two original valuation studies.