Comparing EQ-5D Scores for Comorbid Health Conditions Estimated Using 5 Different Methods
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9101615 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Roberta Ara (Public Health England), John Brazier (0000-0001-8645-4780, Public Health England) |
| Year | 2012 |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 452-459 |
| Publication date | 2012-05-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Medical Care (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0025-7079 • E-ISSN: 1537-1948 |
| Publisher | Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1097/mlr.0b013e318234a04a |
| PMID | 22002647 |
| OpenAlex | W2070188598 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 17 |
BACKGROUND: There is currently no consensus on the most appropriate method to estimate health state utility values (HSUVs) for comorbid health conditions. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to assess the accuracy by applying 5 different methods to an EQ-5D dataset. METHODS: EQ-5D data (n=41,174) from the Health Survey for England were used to compare HSUVs generated using the additive, multiplicative and minimum methods, the adjusted decrement estimator, and a linear regression. RESULTS: The additive and multiplicative methods underestimated the majority of HSUVs and the magnitude of the errors increased as the actual HSUV increased. Conversely, the minimum and adjusted decrement estimator methods overestimated the majority of HSUVs and the magnitude of errors increased as the actual HSUV decreased. Although the simple linear model produced the most accurate results, there was a tendency to underpredict higher HSUVs and overpredict lower HSUVs. The magnitude and direction of mean errors could be driven by the actual scores being estimated in addition to the technique used and the HSUVs estimated using an adjusted baseline were generally more accurate. CONCLUSIONS: The additive and minimum methods performed very poorly in our data. Although the simple linear model gave the most accurate results, the model requires validating in external data obtained from the EQ-5D and other preference-based measures. Based on the current evidence base, we would recommend the multiplicative method is used together with a range of univariate sensitivity analyses
Econometrics · EQ-5D · Estimator · Health related quality of life · Linear regression · Magnitude (astronomy) · Multiplicative function · Multivariate statistics · Statistics · Univariate · Chronic Disease Management Strategies · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Healthcare Policy and Management · Mathematics · Medicine
Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine
Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures
The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36
Advances in prospect theory
Measuring the health burden of chronic disease and injury using health adjusted life expectancy and the Health Utilities Index
Self-Valuation and Societal Valuations of Health State Differ With Disease Severity in Chronic and Disabling Conditions
Utilities Should Not Be Multiplied
Using Instrument-Defined Health State Transitions to Estimate Minimally Important Differences for Four Preference-Based Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments
| Highly cited | No |
|---|