A comparative review of four preference-weighted measures of health-related quality of life

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 56, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 317-325

  Kopec, Jacek A ^a,b   Willison, Kevin D ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b ARTHRITIS RESEARCH CENTRE OF CANADA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Health status; Measurement; Quality of life; Questionnaires; Utilities

Indexed keywords

HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; REVIEW;

EID: 0038628838     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0895-4356(02)00609-1     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. Guyatt G.H., Feeny D.H., Patrick D.L. Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med. 118:1993;622-629.
2. Streiner D.L., Norman G.R. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 2nd edition:1995;Oxford University Press, Oxford.
3. Froberg D.G., Kane R.L. Methodology for measuring health-state preferences - I: measurement strategies. J Clin Epidemiol. 42:1989;345-354.
4. Torrance G.W. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: a review. J Health Econ. 5:1986;1-30.
5. Froberg D.G., Kane R.L. Methodology for measuring health-state preferences - II: scaling methods. J Clin Epidemiol. 42:1989;459-471.
6. Green C., Brazier J., Deverill M. Valuing health-related quality of life: a review of health state valuation techniques. Pharmacoeconomics. 17:2000;151-165.
7. Keeney R.L., Raiffa H. Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. 1976;Wiley, New York.
8. Torrance G.W. Toward a utility theory foundation for health status index models. Health Serv Res. 11:1976;349-369.
9. Lenert L.A. The reliability and internal consistency of an Internet-capable computer program for measuring utilities. Qual Life Res. 9:2000;811-817.
10. Revicki D.A., Kaplan R.M. Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res. 2:1993;477-487.
11. Kaplan R.M., Bush J.W., Berry C.C. Health status: types of validity and the Index of Well-Being. Health Serv Res. 11:1976;478-507.
12. Rosser R., Kind P. A scale of valuations of states of illness: is there a social consensus? Int J Epidemiol. 7:1978;347-358.
13. Torrance G.W., Feeny D.H., Furlong W.J., et al. Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system: Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Med Care. 34:1996;702-722.
14. The EuroQol Group. EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 16:1990;199-208.
15. Hadorn D.C., Uebersax J. Large-scale health outcomes evaluation: how should quality of life be measured? Part I: calibration of a brief questionnaire and a search for preference subgroups. J Clin Epidemiol. 48:1995;607-618.
16. Brazier J., Usherwood T., Harper R., et al. Deriving a preference-based single index from the UK SF-36 Health Survey. J Clin Epidemiol. 51:1998;1115-1128.
17. Revicki D.A., Leidy N.K., Brennan-Diemer F., et al. Integrating patient preferences into health outcomes assessment: the multiattribute Asthma Symptom Utility Index. Chest. 114:1998;998-1007.
18. Krahn M., Ritvo P., Irvine J., et al. Construction of the Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale (PORPUS): a multiattribute health state classification system for prostate cancer. J Clin Epidemiol. 53:2000;920-930.
19. Wolfson M.C. Social proprioception: measurement, data, and information from a population health perspective. Evans R.G., Barer M.L., Marmor T.R. Why are some people healthy and others not? The determinants or health of populations. 1994;287-316 Aldine de Gruyter, New York.
20. Robine J.M., Mathers C.D., Bone R.M., et al. Calculation of health expectancies: harmonization, consensus achieved, and future perspectives. 1993;Colloque INSERM/John Libbey Ltd, Montrouge (France).
21. Brazier J., Deverill M. A checklist for judging preference-based measures of health related quality of life: learning from psychometrics. Health Econ. 8:1999;41-51.
22. Ware J.E., Sherbourne C.D. The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Med Care. 30:1992;473-483.
23. Coons S.J., Rao S., Keininger D.L., et al. A comparative review of generic quality-of-life instruments. Pharmacoeconomics. 17:2000;13-35.
24. Kaplan R.M., Ganiats T.G., Sieber W.J., et al. The Quality of Well-Being Scale: critical similarities and differences with SF-36. Int J Qual Health Care. 10:1998;509-520.
25. Anderson J.P., Kaplan R.M., Berry C.C., et al. Interday reliability of function assessment for a health status measure: the Quality of Well-Being scale. Med Care. 27:1989;1076-1083.
26. Boyle M.H., Torrance G.W., Sinclair J.C., et al. Economic evaluation of neonatal intensive care of very-low-birth-weight infants. N Engl J Med. 308:1983;1330-1337.
27. Feeny D., Furlong W., Barr R.D. A comprehensive multiattribute system for classifying the health status of survivors of childhood cancer. J Clin Oncol. 10:1992;923-928.
28. Feeny D.H., Torrance G.W., Furlong W.J. Health Utilities Index. Spilker B. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. 2nd edition:1996;239-252 Lippincott-Raven Press, Philadelphia.
29. Kind P. The EuroQol instrument: an index of health-related quality of life. Spilker B. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. 2nd edition:1996;191-201 Lippincott-Raven Press, Phildelphia.
30. Brazier J., Roberts J., Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ. 21:2002;271-292.
31. Anderson J.P., Kaplan R.M., Coons S.J., et al. Comparison of the Quality of Well-being Scale and the SF-36 results among two samples of ill adults: AIDS and other illnesses. J Clin Epidemiol. 51:1998;755-762.
32. Visser M.C., Fletcher A.E., Parr G., et al. A comparison of three quality of life instruments in subjects with angina pectoris: the Sickness Impact Profile, the Nottingham Health Profile, and the Quality of Well Being Scale. J Clin Epidemiol. 47:1994;157-163.
33. Liang M.H., Fossel A.H., Larson M.G. Comparisons of five health status instruments for orthopedic evaluation. Med Care. 28:1990;632-642.
34. Guyatt G.H., King D.R., Feeny D.H., et al. Generic and specific measurement of health-related quality of life in a clinical trial of respiratory rehabilitation. J Clin Epidemiol. 52:1999;187-192.
35. Andresen E.M., Patrick D.L., Carter W.B., et al. Comparing the performance of health status measures for healthy older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 43:1995;1030-1034.
36. Beaton D.E., Hogg-Johnson S., Bombardier C. Evaluating changes in health status: reliability and responsiveness of five generic health status measures in workers with musculoskeletal disorders. J Clin Epidemiol. 50:1997;79-93.
37. Kopec J.A., Schultz S., Goel V., Williams J. Can the Health Utilities Index measure change? Med Care. 39:2001;562-574.
38. Austin P., Escobar M., Kopec J. On the use of the Tobit model in analysing health utility indices. J Qual Life Res. 91:2000;465-470.
39. Hollingworth W., Mackenzie R., Todd C.J., et al. Measuring changes in quality of life following magnetic resonance imaging of the knee: SF-36, Euroqol or Rosser index? Qual Life Res. 4:1995;325-334.
40. Essink-Bot M.-L., Krabbe P.F.M., Bonsel G.J., et al. An empirical comparison of four generic health status measures: the Nottingham Health Profile, the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey, the COOP/WONCA charts, and the EuroQol instrument. Med Care. 35:1997;522-537.
41. Jenkinson C., Stradling J., Petersen S. How should we evaluate health status? A comparison of three methods in patients presenting with obstructive sleep apnoea. Qual Life Res. 7:1998;95-100.
42. Jenkinson C., Gray A., Doll H., et al. Evaluation of index and profile measures of health status in a randomized controlled trial: comparison of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, EuroQol, and disease specific measures. Med Care. 35:1997;1109-1118.
43. Myers C., Wilks D. Comparison of Euroqol EQ-5D and SF-36 in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. Qual Life Res. 8:1999;9-16.
44. Johnson J.A., Coons S.J. Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 in an adult US sample. Qual Life Res. 7:1998;155-166.
45. Droman P.J., Slattery J., Farrell B., et al. A randomised comparison of the EuroQol and Short Form-36 after stroke: United Kingdom collaborators in the International Stroke Trial. BMJ. 315:1997;461.
46. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care. 35:1997;1095-1108.
47. Furlong W., Feeny D., Torrance G.W., et al. Multiplicative multi-attribute utility function for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) system: a technical report. 1998;Centre for a Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Hamilton (Ontario).
48. Dolan P., Roberts J. Modelling valuations for Eq-5d health states: an alternative model using differences in valuations. Med Care. 40:2002;442-446.
49. Hawthorne G., Richardson J., Day N.A. A comparison of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) with four other generic utility instruments. Ann Med. 33:2001;358-370.
50. Belanger A., Berthelot J.-M., Guimond E., et al. A head-to-head comparison of two generic health status measures in the household population: McMaster Health Utilities Index (Mark 3) and the EQ-5D. 2000;Statistics Canada, Health Analysis and Modelling Group, Ottawa.
51. Bosch J.L., Hunink M.G. Comparison of the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) and the EuroQol EQ-5D in patients treated for intermittent claudication. Qual Life Res. 9:2000;591-601.
52. Suarez-Almazor M.E., Conner-Spady B. Rating of arthritis health states by patients, physicians, and the general public: implications for cost-utility analyses. J Rheumatol. 28:2001;648-656.
53. Chancellor J.V.M., Coyle D., Drummond M.F. Constructing health state preference values from descriptive quality of life outcomes: mission impossible? Qual Life Res. 6:1997;159-168.
54. Erickson P. Modeling health-related quality of life: the bridge between psychometric and utility-based measures. J Nat Cancer Inst Monogr. 20:1996;17-22.
55. Krabbe P.F., Essink-Bot M.L., Bonsel G.J. The comparability and reliability of five health-state valuation methods. Soc Sci Med. 45:1997;1641-1652.
56. Carr-Hill R.A. Health related quality of life measurement-Euro style. Health Policy. 20:1992;321-328.
57. Kopec, J.A., Brant, R., (2001). Modelling preferences for complex health states [abstract]. Presented at the Meeting of the International Society for Quality of Life Research. November 7-9, 2001. Amsterdam.
58. Lenert L., Kaplan R.M. Validity and interpretation of preference-based measures of health-related quality of life. Med Care. 38:(Suppl):2000;138-150.