Literature DB >> 29569014

Do country-specific preference weights matter in the choice of mapping algorithms? The case of mapping the Diabetes-39 onto eight country-specific EQ-5D-5L value sets.

Admassu N Lamu1, Gang Chen2, Thor Gamst-Klaussen1, Jan Abel Olsen1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To develop mapping algorithms that transform Diabetes-39 (D-39) scores onto EQ-5D-5L utility values for each of eight recently published country-specific EQ-5D-5L value sets, and to compare mapping functions across the EQ-5D-5L value sets.
METHODS: Data include 924 individuals with self-reported diabetes from six countries. The D-39 dimensions, age and gender were used as potential predictors for EQ-5D-5L utilities, which were scored using value sets from eight countries (England, Netherland, Spain, Canada, Uruguay, China, Japan and Korea). Ordinary least squares, generalised linear model, beta binomial regression, fractional regression, MM estimation and censored least absolute deviation were used to estimate the mapping algorithms. The optimal algorithm for each country-specific value set was primarily selected based on normalised root mean square error (NRMSE), normalised mean absolute error (NMAE) and adjusted-r2. Cross-validation with fivefold approach was conducted to test the generalizability of each model.
RESULTS: The fractional regression model with loglog as a link function consistently performed best in all country-specific value sets. For instance, the NRMSE (0.1282) and NMAE (0.0914) were the lowest, while adjusted-r2 was the highest (52.5%) when the English value set was considered. Among D-39 dimensions, the energy and mobility was the only one that was consistently significant for all models.
CONCLUSIONS: The D-39 can be mapped onto the EQ-5D-5L utilities with good predictive accuracy. The fractional regression model, which is appropriate for handling bounded outcomes, outperformed other candidate methods in all country-specific value sets. However, the regression coefficients differed reflecting preference heterogeneity across countries.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diabetes-39; EQ-5D-5L; HRQoL; Mapping; QALY; Utility

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29569014     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-018-1840-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  33 in total

1.  Mapping QLQ-C30, HAQ, and MSIS-29 on EQ-5D.

Authors:  Matthijs M Versteegh; Annemieke Leunis; Jolanda J Luime; Mike Boggild; Carin A Uyl-de Groot; Elly A Stolk
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-11-22       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  Analysis of SF-6D index data: is beta regression appropriate?

Authors:  Matthias Hunger; Jens Baumert; Rolf Holle
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2011-05-31       Impact factor: 5.725

3.  Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets.

Authors:  Ben van Hout; M F Janssen; You-Shan Feng; Thomas Kohlmann; Jan Busschbach; Dominik Golicki; Andrew Lloyd; Luciana Scalone; Paul Kind; A Simon Pickard
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2012-05-24       Impact factor: 5.725

4.  Mapping to obtain EQ-5D utility values for use in NICE health technology assessments.

Authors:  Louise Longworth; Donna Rowen
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2013 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.725

5.  Mapping Between the Sydney Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ-S) and Five Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments (MAUIs).

Authors:  Billingsley Kaambwa; Gang Chen; Julie Ratcliffe; Angelo Iezzi; Aimee Maxwell; Jeff Richardson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  In search of a common currency: A comparison of seven EQ-5D-5L value sets.

Authors:  Jan Abel Olsen; Admassu N Lamu; John Cairns
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 3.046

7.  Diabetes and quality of life: Comparing results from utility instruments and Diabetes-39.

Authors:  Gang Chen; Angelo Iezzi; John McKie; Munir A Khan; Jeff Richardson
Journal:  Diabetes Res Clin Pract       Date:  2015-05-12       Impact factor: 5.602

8.  Comparison of Value Set Based on DCE and/or TTO Data: Scoring for EQ-5D-5L Health States in Japan.

Authors:  Takeru Shiroiwa; Shunya Ikeda; Shinichi Noto; Ataru Igarashi; Takashi Fukuda; Shinya Saito; Kojiro Shimozuma
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2016-04-26       Impact factor: 5.725

9.  Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L).

Authors:  M Herdman; C Gudex; A Lloyd; Mf Janssen; P Kind; D Parkin; G Bonsel; X Badia
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-04-09       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 10.  Review of studies mapping from quality of life or clinical measures to EQ-5D: an online database.

Authors:  Helen Dakin
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2013-09-05       Impact factor: 3.186

View more
  4 in total

1.  Testing alternative regression models to predict utilities: mapping the QLQ-C30 onto the EQ-5D-5L and the SF-6D.

Authors:  Admassu N Lamu; Jan Abel Olsen
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2018-09-01       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Does linear equating improve prediction in mapping? Crosswalking MacNew onto EQ-5D-5L value sets.

Authors:  Admassu N Lamu
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2020-04-16

3.  Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Different Diseases Measured With the EQ-5D-5L: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ting Zhou; Haijing Guan; Luying Wang; Yao Zhang; Mingjun Rui; Aixia Ma
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2021-06-29

4.  HIT-6 and EQ-5D-5L in patients with migraine: assessment of common latent constructs and development of a mapping algorithm.

Authors:  Tobias Kurth; Annette Aigner; Ana Sofia Oliveira Gonçalves; Dimitra Panteli; Lars Neeb
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2021-07-10
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.