Literature DB >> 22583466

Tails from the peak district: adjusted limited dependent variable mixture models of EQ-5D questionnaire health state utility values.

Mónica Hernández Alava1, Allan J Wailoo, Roberta Ara.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Health utility data generated by using the EuroQol five-dimensional (EQ-5D) questionnaire are right bounded at 1 with a substantial gap to the next set of observations, left bounded, and multimodal. These features present challenges to the estimation of the effect of clinical and socioeconomic characteristics on health utilities. Our objective was to develop and demonstrate an appropriate method for dealing with these features.
METHODS: We developed a statistical model that incorporates an adjusted limited dependent variable approach to reflect the upper bound and the large gap in feasible EQ-5D questionnaire values. Further flexibility was then gained by adopting a mixture modeling framework to address the multimodality of the EQ-5D questionnaire distribution. We compared the performance of these approaches with that of those frequently adopted in the literature (linear and Tobit models) by using data from a clinical trial of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
RESULTS: We found that three latent classes are appropriate in estimating EQ-5D questionnaire values from function, pain, and sociodemographic factors. Superior performance of the adjusted limited dependent variable mixture model was achieved in terms of Akaike and Bayesian information criteria, root mean square error, and mean absolute error. Unlike other approaches, the adjusted limited dependent variable mixture model fits the data well at high EQ-5D questionnaire levels and cannot predict unfeasible EQ-5D questionnaire values.
CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of the EQ-5D questionnaire is characterized by features that raise statistical challenges. It is well known that standard approaches do not perform well for this reason. This article developed an appropriate method to reflect these features by combining limited dependent variable and mixture modeling and demonstrated superior performance in a rheumatoid arthritis setting. Further refinement of the general framework and testing in other data sets are warranted. Analysis of utility data should apply methods that recognize the distributional features of the data.
Copyright © 2012 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22583466     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.12.014

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


  56 in total

1.  Discrepancies between the Dermatology Life Quality Index and utility scores.

Authors:  Fanni Rencz; Petra Baji; László Gulácsi; Sarolta Kárpáti; Márta Péntek; Adrienn Katalin Poór; Valentin Brodszky
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Mapping MacNew Heart Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire onto country-specific EQ-5D-5L utility scores: a comparison of traditional regression models with a machine learning technique.

Authors:  Lan Gao; Wei Luo; Utsana Tonmukayakul; Marj Moodie; Gang Chen
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2021-01-13

3.  Mapping clinical outcomes to generic preference-based outcome measures: development and comparison of methods.

Authors:  Mónica Hernández Alava; Allan Wailoo; Stephen Pudney; Laura Gray; Andrea Manca
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 4.014

Review 4.  The Use of Mapping to Estimate Health State Utility Values.

Authors:  Roberta Ara; Donna Rowen; Clara Mukuria
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Mapping between HAQ-DI and EQ-5D-5L in a Chinese patient population.

Authors:  Thomas Patton; Hao Hu; Luan Luan; Keqin Yang; Shu-Chuen Li
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2018-07-04       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 6.  Certolizumab Pegol for Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis Following Inadequate Response to a TNF-α Inhibitor: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal.

Authors:  Iñigo Bermejo; Matt Stevenson; Rachel Archer; John W Stevens; Edward Goka; Mark Clowes; David L Scott; Adam Young
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Cost-utility analysis of tocilizumab monotherapy in first line versus standard of care for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Greece.

Authors:  Kostas Athanasakis; Filippos Tarantilis; Konstantina Tsalapati; Thomais Konstantopoulou; Eleni Vritzali; John Kyriopoulos
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2015-03-21       Impact factor: 2.631

8.  Mapping the disease-specific LupusQoL to the SF-6D.

Authors:  Rachel Meacock; Mark Harrison; Kathleen McElhone; Janice Abbott; Sahena Haque; Ian Bruce; Lee-Suan Teh
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-12-16       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Modelling outcomes of complex treatment strategies following a clinical guideline for treatment decisions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  An Tran-Duy; Annelies Boonen; Wietske Kievit; Piet L C M van Riel; Mart A F J van de Laar; Johan L Severens
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Mapping health assessment questionnaire disability index (HAQ-DI) score, pain visual analog scale (VAS), and disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28) onto the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) utility score with the KORean Observational study Network for Arthritis (KORONA) registry data.

Authors:  Hye-Lin Kim; Dam Kim; Eun Jin Jang; Min-Young Lee; Hyun Jin Song; Sun-Young Park; Soo-Kyung Cho; Yoon-Kyoung Sung; Chan-Bum Choi; Soyoung Won; So-Young Bang; Hoon-Suk Cha; Jung-Yoon Choe; Won Tae Chung; Seung-Jae Hong; Jae-Bum Jun; Jinseok Kim; Seong-Kyu Kim; Tae-Hwan Kim; Tae-Jong Kim; Eunmi Koh; Hwajeong Lee; Hye-Soon Lee; Jisoo Lee; Shin-Seok Lee; Sung Won Lee; Sung-Hoon Park; Seung-Cheol Shim; Dae-Hyun Yoo; Bo Young Yoon; Sang-Cheol Bae; Eui-Kyung Lee
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2016-02-06       Impact factor: 2.631

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.