Estimating domestic values for EQ-5D health states using survey data from external sources

Medical Care

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 168-175

  Chuang, Ling Hsiang ^a   Zarate, Victor ^b   Kind, Paul ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

Author keywords

EQ 5D; Utility; Value set

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HEALTH; HEALTH STATUS; METHODOLOGY; POPULATION; SCORING SYSTEM; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CULTURAL FACTOR; ECONOMICS; HEALTH SERVICE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PAIN ASSESSMENT; QUESTIONNAIRE; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH SERVICES; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PAIN MEASUREMENT; QUESTIONNAIRES; STATE MEDICINE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 59049093677     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181893f56     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London, UK: National Institute for Clinical Excellence; 2004.
2. Brook R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy. 1996;37: 53-72.
3. Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med. 2001;33:337-343.
4. The MVH Group. The Measurement and Valuation of Health: First Report on the Main Survey. York, England: Centre for Health Economics, University of York; 1994.
5. Badia X, Roset M, Herdman M, et al. A comparison of UK and Spanish general population time trade off values for EQ-5D health states. Med Decis Making. 2001;21:7-16.
6. Wittup-Jensen K, Lauridsen J, Gudex C, et al. Estimating Danish EQ-5D tariffs using TTO and VAS. In: Norinder AL, Pederson KM, Roos P, eds. Proceeding of the 18th Plenary Meeting of the EuroQol Group. Copenhagen, Denmark, IHE: The Swedish Institute for Health Economics; 2002:257-292.
7. Tsuchiya A, Ikeda S, Ikegami N, et al. Estimating an EQ-5D population value set: the case of Japan. Health Econ. 2002;11:341-353.
8. Shaw JW, Johnson JA, Coons SJ. US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: development and testing of the Dl valuation model. Med Care. 2005;43:203-220.
9. The EuroQoL Group website. Available at: http://www.euroqol.org. Accessed July 20, 2007.
10. The MVH Group. The Measurement and Valuation of Health: Final Report on the Modelling of Valuation Tariffs. York, England: Centre for Health Economics, University of York; 1996.
11. Pharmacoeconomic guideline around the world in the website of international society of pharmacoeconomics and outcome research. Available at: http://www.ispor.org/. Accessed March 24, 2008.
12. Burstrom K, Johannesson M, Diderichsen F. A comparison of individual and social time trade off values for health states in the general population. Health Policy. 2006;76:359-370.
13. Torrance GW, Fenny DH, Furlong WJ, et al. Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system: Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Med Care. 1996;34:702-722.
14. Fenny DH, Furlong WJ, Torrance GW, et al. Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the Health Utilities Index 3 system. Med Care. 2002;40:113-128.
15. Ware JE, Sonw KK, Kosinski M, et al. SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1993.
16. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scale: A User's Manual. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1994.
17. Kind P. Valuing Eq-5d Health States-A vastly simpler solution? Paper presented at 24th EuroQol Plenary Meeting; 2007. Hague, The Netherlands.
18. Insinga R, Fryback D. Understanding differences between self-rating and population ratings for health in the EuroQOL. Qual Life Res. 2003;12:611-619.
19. Kind P, Hennessy S, Macran S. The value of hypothetical and "real" EQ-5D health states and other things: a fairytale for the children's' session at the EuroQoL Scientific Plenary. Paper presented at: 21st Plenary meeting of the EuroQoL Group; 2004: 91-106. Chicago, IL.
20. The U.S. valuation of the EuroQol EQ-5D Health States project website. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/rice/EQ5Dproj.htm. Accessed January 20, 2007.
21. Gudex C, Dolan P, Kind P, et al. Health state valuations from the general public using the Visual Analogue Scale. Qual Life Res. 1996;5:521-531.
22. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, et al. The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ. 1996;5:141-154.
23. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care. 1997;35:1095-1108.
24. Johnson JA, Luo N, Shaw JW, et al. Valuations of EQ-5D health states: are the United States and United Kingdom different? Med Care. 2005; 43:221-228.
25. Badia X, Fernandez E, Segura A. Influence of socio-demographic and health status variables on evaluation of health states in a Spanish population. Eur J Public Health. 1995;5:87-93.
26. Hadirn D, Uebersax J. Large-scale outcome evaluation: how should quality of life be measured? I. Calibration of a brief questionnaire and a search for preference subgroups. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:607-618.
27. Kind P, Dolan P. The effect of past and present illness experience on the valuaiton of health states. Med Care. 1995;33:AS255-AS63.
28. Dolan P. The effect of experience of illness on health state valuation. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:551-564.
29. De Wit G, Busschbach J, De Charro F. Sensitivity and perspective in the valuation of health status: whose values count? Health Econ. 2000;9:109-126.
30. Bjork S, Norinder A. The weighting exercise for the Swedish version of the EuroQoL. Health Econ. 1999;8:117-126.
31. Zethraeus N, Johannesson M. A comparison of patient and social tariff values derived form the time trade-off method. Health Econ. 1999;8:541-545.
32. Bosch J, Hunink M. Comparison of the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) and the EuroQoL EQ-5D in patients treated for intermittent elucidation. Qual Life Res. 2000;9:591-601.
33. Polsky D, Willke R, Scott W, et al. A comparison of scoring weights for the EuroQoL derived form patients and the general public. Health Econ. 2001;10:27-37.
34. Badia X, Diaz-Prieto A, Rue M, et al. Measuring health and healthstate preferences among critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med. 1996;22:1379-1384.
35. The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Data website. Available at: http://www.meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb. Accessed January 20, 2007.
36. Torrance G, Feeny D, Furlong W. Visual analogue scales: do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health state? Med Decis Making. 2001;21:329-334.
37. Parkin D, Devlin N. Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost-utility analysis? Health Econ. 2006;15:653-664.