Literature DB >> 17304081

The transformation of utilities for health states worse than death: consequences for the estimation of EQ-5D value sets.

Leida M Lamers1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Utilities for health are measured on an interval scale, where 1 refers to full health and 0 refers to death. No theoretical lower boundary on the utilities for states worse than death exists. As a consequence, negative values receive greater weight in the calculation of mean utilities. To avoid this, negative values often are bound at -1.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the effect of 3 methods to bound negative values at -1 on the estimation of EQ-5D value sets: truncation, monotonic, and linear transformation.
METHOD: Data of the Dutch EQ-5D valuation study were used. A total of 298 respondents directly valued 17 EQ-5D health states using the time trade-off (TTO) method. Random effects regression analysis was used to interpolate TTO values for all possible EQ-5D states. In the regression analysis the dependent variable is 1 minus the TTO value and the independent variables describe the health state. Two widely used models to estimate EQ-5D value were applied after truncation of negative values and monotonic and linear transformation of negative values. Both models also were estimated on medians.
RESULTS: Truncation of negative values gave the largest mean absolute error (MAE); the linear transformation resulted in the smallest MAE. When medians were used for estimation, the MAEs were comparable with the estimation on means.
CONCLUSION: The choice of a method to bound negative values is arbitrary and affects the resulting value set. For the estimation of EQ-5D value sets from a societal perspective the use of medians should be considered.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17304081     DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000252166.76255.68

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  28 in total

1.  Time trade-off and attitudes toward euthanasia: implications of using 'death' as an anchor in health state valuation.

Authors:  Liv A Augestad; Kim Rand-Hendriksen; Knut Stavem; Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-06-08       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Neck pain patients' preference scores for their current health.

Authors:  Gabrielle van der Velde; Sheilah Hogg-Johnson; Ahmed M Bayoumi; Pierre Côté; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; Eric L Hurwitz; Murray Krahn
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-03-27       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Revisiting United States valuation of EQ-5D states.

Authors:  Benjamin M Craig; Jan J V Busschbach
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2011-07-21       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  An EQ-5D-5L value set based on Uruguayan population preferences.

Authors:  Federico Augustovski; Lucila Rey-Ares; Vilma Irazola; Osvaldo Ulises Garay; Oscar Gianneo; Graciela Fernández; Marcelo Morales; Luz Gibbons; Juan Manuel Ramos-Goñi
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Valuing EQ-5D using time trade-off in France.

Authors:  Julie Chevalier; Gérard de Pouvourville
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2011-09-21

6.  Feasibility, comparability, and reliability of the standard gamble compared with the rating scale and time trade-off techniques in Korean population.

Authors:  Seon-Ha Kim; Sang-Il Lee; Min-Woo Jo
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Impact of transformation of negative values and regression models on differences between the UK and US EQ-5D time trade-off value sets.

Authors:  Liv Ariane Augestad; Kim Rand-Hendriksen; Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen; Knut Stavem
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-12-01       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  The better than dead method: feasibility and interpretation of a valuation study.

Authors:  R A van Hoorn; A R T Donders; M Oppe; P F M Stalmeier
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  US valuation of the SF-6D.

Authors:  Benjamin M Craig; A Simon Pickard; Elly Stolk; John E Brazier
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2013-04-29       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  From a different angle: a novel approach to health valuation.

Authors:  Benjamin M Craig; Mark Oppe
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2009-10-31       Impact factor: 4.634

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.