A view from the bridge: Agreement between the SF-6D utility algorithm and the Health Utilities Index

Health Economics

Volumn 12, Issue 11, 2003, Pages 975-981

  O'Brien, Bernie J ^a,b   Spath, Marian ^b,c   Blackhouse, Gordon ^a,b   Severens, J L ^d   Dorian, Paul ^e   Brazier, John ^f  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b CENTRE FOR EVALUATION OF MEDICINES   (Canada)

^c RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^e ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Health utilities; HU13; SF 6D

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; DEFIBRILLATOR; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEART DEATH; HEART INFARCTION; HISTOGRAM; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; RELIABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STUDENT T TEST;

ALGORITHMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEATH, SUDDEN, CARDIAC; DEFIBRILLATORS, IMPLANTABLE; EUROPE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 0242439635     PISSN: 10579230     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hec.789     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Ware JE, Donald C. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30: 473-481.
2. Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. (2nd edn) Oxford medical publications: New York; 1997.
3. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: A review. J Health Econ 1986; 5: 1-30.
4. Nichol MB, Sengupta N, Globe DR. Evaluating quality-adjusted life years: estimation of the Health Utility Index (HUI2) from the SF-36. Med Decision Making 2001; 21: 105-112.
5. Fryback DG, Lawrence WF, Martin PA, Klein R, Klein BEK. Predicting Quality of Well-being scores from the SF-36: results from the Beaver Dam Health Outcome Study. Med Decision Making 1997; 17(1): 1-9.
6. Keeney RL, Raiffa RL. Decisions with Multiple Objectives. Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. (1st edn). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge; 1993.
7. Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle MH, Torrance GW. Multi-attribute health status classification systems. Health Utilities Index. PharmacoEconomics 1995; 7(6): 490-502.
8. Kind P, Dolan P, Gudex C, Williams A. Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ 1998; 316(7133): 736-741.
9. Brazier JE, Usherwood T, Harper R, Thomas KJ. Deriving a preference-based single index from the UK SF-36 health survey. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51(11): 1115-1128.
10. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002; 21: 271-292.
11. Hohnloser SH, Connolly SJ, Kuck KH et al. The defibrillator in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial (DINAMIT): study protocol. Am Heart J 2000; 140: 735-739.
12. Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW et al. Multi-Attribute and Single-Attribute Utility Functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 System. Medical Care, 2002.
13. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B. SF-36 Health Survey: manual and interpretation guide. The Health Institute, New England Medical Centre, Nimrod Press: Boston, MA, 1993.
14. Drummond MF. Introducing economic and quality of life measurements into clinical studies. Ann Med 2001; 33: 344-349.
15. Samsa G, Edelman D, Rothman M, Rhys Williams G, Lipscomb J, Matchar D. Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: A general approach with illustration using the health utilities index Mark II. PharmacoEconomics 1999; 15: 141-155.