Literature DB >> 29052163

The Use of Health State Utility Values in Decision Models.

Roberta Ara1, John Brazier2, Ismail Azzabi Zouraq3.   

Abstract

Methodological issues of how to use health state utility values (HSUVs) in decision models arise frequently, including the most appropriate evidence to use as the baseline (e.g. the baseline HSUVs associated with avoiding a particular health condition or event), how to capture changes due to adverse events and how to appropriately capture uncertainty in progressive conditions where the expected change in quality of life is likely to be monotonically decreasing over time. As preference-based measures provide different values when collected from the same patient, it is important to ensure that all HSUVs used within a single model are obtained from the same instrument where ever possible. When people enter the model without the condition of interest (e.g. primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, screening or vaccination programmes), appropriate age- and gender-adjusted HSUVs from people without the particular condition should be used as the baseline. General population norms may be used as a proxy if the exact condition-specific evidence is not available. Individual discrete health states should be used for serious adverse reactions to treatment and the corresponding HSUVs sourced as normal. Care should be taken to avoid double counting when capturing the effects for both less severe adverse reactions (e.g. itchy skin rash or dry cough) and more severe adverse events (e.g. fatigue in oncology). Transparency in reporting standards for both the justification of the evidence used and any 'adjustments' is important to increase readers' confidence that the evidence used is the most appropriate available.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29052163     DOI: 10.1007/s40273-017-0550-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  19 in total

Review 1.  Systematic review and empirical comparison of contemporaneous EQ-5D and SF-6D group mean scores.

Authors:  David G T Whitehurst; Stirling Bryan; Martyn Lewis
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-10-12       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  Populating an economic model with health state utility values: moving toward better practice.

Authors:  Roberta Ara; John E Brazier
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2010-03-10       Impact factor: 5.725

3.  A safety grading scale to support dose escalation and define stopping rules for healthy subject first-entry-into-man studies: some points to consider from the French Club Phase I working group.

Authors:  Michel Sibille; Alain Patat; Henri Caplain; Yves Donazzolo
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 4.  Health-state utility values in breast cancer.

Authors:  Tessa Peasgood; Sue E Ward; John Brazier
Journal:  Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.217

Review 5.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of utility-based quality of life for osteoporosis-related conditions.

Authors:  L Si; T M Winzenberg; B de Graaff; A J Palmer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-02-22       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Health-related quality-of-life implications of cardiovascular events in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A subanalysis from the Saxagliptin Assessment of Vascular Outcomes Recorded in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus (SAVOR)-TIMI 53 trial.

Authors:  Andrew H Briggs; Deepak L Bhatt; Benjamin M Scirica; Itamar Raz; Karissa M Johnston; Shelagh M Szabo; Klas Bergenheim; Jayanti Mukherjee; Boaz Hirshberg; Ofri Mosenzon
Journal:  Diabetes Res Clin Pract       Date:  2017-01-23       Impact factor: 5.602

Review 7.  Health-state utilities in liver disease: a systematic review.

Authors:  David J McLernon; John Dillon; Peter T Donnan
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2008-04-18       Impact factor: 2.583

8.  A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups.

Authors:  John Brazier; Jennifer Roberts; Aki Tsuchiya; Jan Busschbach
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.046

9.  Assessing differences in utility scores: a comparison of four widely used preference-based instruments.

Authors:  Hwee-Lin Wee; David Machin; Wai-Chiong Loke; Shu-Chuen Li; Yin-Bun Cheung; Nan Luo; David Feeny; Kok-Yong Fong; Julian Thumboo
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2007 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.725

10.  A comparison between the EQ-5D and the SF-6D in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Authors:  Jing Chen; Carlos K H Wong; Sarah M McGhee; Polly K P Pang; Wai-Cho Yu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-11-07       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  6 in total

1.  Association between knee symptoms, change in knee symptoms over 6-9 years, and SF-6D health state utility among middle-aged Australians.

Authors:  Ambrish Singh; Julie A Campbell; Alison Venn; Graeme Jones; Leigh Blizzard; Andrew J Palmer; Terence Dwyer; Flavia Cicuttini; Changhai Ding; Benny Antony
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  International Regulations and Recommendations for Utility Data for Health Technology Assessment.

Authors:  Donna Rowen; Ismail Azzabi Zouraq; Helene Chevrou-Severac; Ben van Hout
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Heath State Utility Values for Cost-Effectiveness Models.

Authors:  Jonathan Karnon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Health Utility Measures Among Patients with Androgenetic Alopecia After Hair Transplant.

Authors:  Roy Xiao; Ciersten A Burks; Jenny Yau; Adeeb Derakhshan; Rui Han Liu; Maryanne M Senna; Mariko R Yasuda; Nate Jowett; Linda N Lee
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2022-08-23       Impact factor: 2.708

5.  Local Instrumental Variable Methods to Address Confounding and Heterogeneity when Using Electronic Health Records: An Application to Emergency Surgery.

Authors:  Silvia Moler-Zapata; Richard Grieve; David Lugo-Palacios; A Hutchings; R Silverwood; Luke Keele; Tommaso Kircheis; David Cromwell; Neil Smart; Robert Hinchliffe; Stephen O'Neill
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2022-05-24       Impact factor: 2.749

6.  Association of Hair Loss With Health Utility Measurements Before and After Hair Transplant Surgery in Men and Women.

Authors:  Nicholas B Abt; Olivia Quatela; Alyssa Heiser; Nate Jowett; Oren Tessler; Linda N Lee
Journal:  JAMA Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 4.611

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.