Three methods tested to model SF-6D health utilities for health states involving comorbidity/co-occurring conditions

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 63, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 331-341

  Hanmer, Janel ^a   Vanness, David ^a   Gangnon, Ronald ^a   Palta, Mari ^a   Fryback, Dennis G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian analysis; Comorbidity; Health survey; Quality of life; SF 36; Statistical model; Theoretical model

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMORBIDITY; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; SHORT FORM 36; SHORT FORM 6D; STATISTICAL MODEL; THEORETICAL MODEL;

AGED; CHRONIC DISEASE; COMORBIDITY; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICARE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 75749122589     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.013     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. In: Gold M.R., Russell L.B., and Weinstein M.C. (Eds). Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine (1996), Oxford University Press, New York
2. Miller W., Robinson L.A., and Lawrence R.S. Valuing health for regulatory analysis (2006), The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
3. Brauer C.A., Rosen A.B., Greenberg D., and Neumann P.J. Trends in the measurement of health utilities in published cost-utility analyses. Value Health 9 (2006) 213-218
4. Bolen J., Sniezek J., Theis K., Helmick C., Hootman J., Brady T., et al. Racial/ethnic differences in the prevalence and impact of doctor-diagnosed arthritis-United States, 2002. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 54 (2005) 119-123
5. Thrall J.H. Prevalence and costs of chronic disease in a health care system structured for treatment of acute illness. Radiology 235 (2005) 9-12
6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Healthy aging: preventing disease and improving quality of life among older Americans. 2007. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/publications/aag/aging.htm. Accessed July 2008.
7. Wu S., and Green A. Projection of chronic illness prevalence and cost inflation (2000), RAND Health, Santa Monica, CA
8. Fryback D.G., Dasbach E.J., Klein R., Klein B.E., Dorn N., Peterson K., et al. The Beaver Dam Health Outcomes study: initial catalog of health-state quality factors. Med Decis Making 13 (1993) 89-102
9. Gold M.R., Franks P., McCoy K.I., and Fryback D.G. Toward consistency in cost-utility analyses: using national measures to create condition-specific values. Med Care 36 (1998) 778-792
10. Mitmann N., Trakas K., Risebrough N., and Lie B.A. Utility scores for chronic conditions in a community-dwelling population. Pharmacoeconomics 15 (1999) 369-376
11. Ko Y., and Coons S.J. Self-reported chronic conditions and EQ-5D index scores in the US adult population. Curr Med Res Opin 22 (2006) 2065-2071
12. Saarni S.L., Harkanen T., Sintonen H., Suvisaari J., Koskinen S., Aromaa A., et al. The impact of 29 chronic conditions on health-related quality of life: a general population survey in Finland using 15D and EQ-5D. Qual Life Res 15 (2006) 1403-1414
13. Sullivan P.W., Lawrence W.F., and Ghushchyan V. A national catalog of preference-based scores for chronic conditions in the United States. Med Care 43 (2005) 736-749
14. Sullivan P.W., and Ghushchyan V. Preference-based EQ-5D index scores for chronic conditions in the United States. Med Decis Making 26 (2006) 410-420
15. Flanagan W., McIntosh C.N., Le Petit C., and Berthelot J.M. Deriving utility scores for co-morbid conditions: a test of the multiplicative model for combining individual condition scores. Popul Health Metr 4 (2006) 13. http://www.pophealthmetrics.com/content/4/1/13 Available at http://www.pophealthmetrics.com/content/4/1/13 Accessed June 2007
16. van Baal P.H.M., Hoeymans N., Hoogenveen R.T., de Wit G.A., and Westert G.P. Disability weights for comorbidity and their influence on health-adjusted life expectancy. Popul Health Metr 4 (2006) 1. http://www.pophealthmetrics.com/content/4/1/1 Available at http://www.pophealthmetrics.com/content/4/1/1 Accessed June 2007
17. Dale W., Basu A., Elstein A., and Meltzer D. Predicting utility ratings for joint health states from single health states in prostate cancer: empirical testing of three alternative theories. Med Decis Making 28 (2008) 102-112
18. Gold M.R., Stevenson D., and Fryback D.G. HALYs and QALYs and DALYs, Oh My: similarities and differences in summary measures of population health. Annu Rev Public Health 23 (2002) 115-134
19. Jones N., Jones S.L., and Miller N.A. The Medicare Health Outcomes Survey program: overview, context, and near-term prospects. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2 (2004) 33. http://www.hqlo.com/content/2/1/33 Available at http://www.hqlo.com/content/2/1/33 Accessed June 2007
20. Ware Jr. J.E., Snow K.K., Kosinski M., and Gandek M. SF-36 health survey manual and interpretation guide (1993), The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, Boston, MA
21. Brazier J., Roberts J., and Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 21 (2002) 271-292
22. Brazier J.E., and Roberts J. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Med Care 42 (2004) 851-859
23. Lunn D.J., Thomas A., Best N., and Spiegelhalter D. WinBUGS-a Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. Stat Comput 10 (2000) 325-337
24. Spiegelhalter D.J., Best N.G., Carlin B.P., and Van der Linde A. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit (with discussion). J R Stat Soc B 64 (2002) 583-616
25. Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health. The cost-effectiveness analysis registry [internet]. (Boston, MA), Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center. Available at : http://www.cearegistry.org Accessed May 2009.
26. Cohen J.W., Monheit A.C., Beauregard K.M., Cohen S.B., Lefkowitz D.C., Potter D.E., et al. The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey: a national health information resource. Inquiry 33 (1996-1997) 373-389 Winter
27. Beland Y. Canadian community health survey-methodological overview. Health Rep 13 (2002) 9-14
28. Walter S.J., and Brazier J.E. What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes 1 (2003) 4. http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/4 Available at http://www.hqlo.com/content/1/1/4 Accessed June 2007
29. Walter S.J., and Brazier J.E. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res 14 (2005) 1523-1532
30. Guyatt G., Walter S., and Norman G. Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chronic Dis 40 (1987) 171-178