A comparison of United States and United Kingdom EQ-5D health states valuations using a nonparametric Bayesian method

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 29, Issue 15, 2010, Pages 1622-1634

  Kharroubi, Samer A ^a   O'Hagan, Anthony ^b   Brazier, John E ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

EQ 5D; Nonparametric methods; Preference based health measure; Time trade off

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYESIAN LEARNING; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; CULTURAL FACTOR; EQ 5D HEALTH STATE VALUATION; ETHNIC DIFFERENCE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MULTICENTER STUDY; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; PLACE PREFERENCE; POPULATION; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; REFERENCE VALUE; STATISTICAL MODEL; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES;

AGE FACTORS; ALGORITHMS; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BAYES THEOREM; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SEX FACTORS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77953729519     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3874     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996; 37:53-72.
2. Torrance GW, Feeny DH, Furlong WJ, Barr RD, Zhang Y, Wang QA. Multi-attribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system: Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Medical Care 1996; 34:702-722. (Pubitemid 126433265)
3. Feeny DH, Furlong WJ, Torrance GW, Goldsmith CH, Zenglong Z, Depauw S, Denton M, Boyle M. Multi-attribute and single-attribute utility function for the Health Utility Index Mark 3 system. Medical Care 2002; 40:113-128.
4. Sintonen H. The 15D-measure of health-related quality of life. I. Reliability, validity and sensitivity of its health state descriptive system. Working Paper 41, National Centre for Health Program Evaluation, Melbourne, 1994.
5. Sintonen H. The 15D-measure of health-related quality of life. II. Feasibility, reliability and validity of its valuation system. Working Paper 42, National Centre for Health Program Evaluation, Melbourne, 1995.
6. Hawthorne G, Richardson G, Atherton-Day N. A comparison of the assessment of quality of life (AQoL) with four other generic utility instruments. Annals of Medicine 2001; 33:358-370. (Pubitemid 32675377)
7. Kaplan RM, Anderson JP. A general health policy model: update and application. Health Services Research 1988; 23:203-235.
8. Brazier JE, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics 2002; 21:271-292. (Pubitemid 34143147)
9. Revicki DA, Leidy NK, Brennan-Diemer F, Sorenson S, Togias A. Integrating patients' preferences into health outcomes assessment: the multiattribute asthma symptom utility index. Chest 1998; 114:998-1007. (Pubitemid 28495893)
10. Brazier JE, Czoski-Murray C, Roberts J, Brown M, Symonds T, Kelleher C. Estimation of a preference-based index from a condition specific measure: the King's Health Questionnaire. Medical Decision Making 2007; 28:113-126.
11. Drummond MF, Sculpher M, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford Medical Publications: Oxford, 2005.
12. Badia X, Roset M, Herdman M, Kind P. A comparison of United Kingdom and Spanish general population time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states. Medical Decision Making 2001; 20:7-16. (Pubitemid 32245026)
13. Tsuchiya A, Ikeda S, Ikegami N. Estimating an EQ-5D population value set: the case of Japan. Health Economics 2002; 11:341-353. (Pubitemid 34578418)
14. Johnson JA, Luo N, Shaw JW, Kind P, Coons SJ. Valuations of EQ-5D health states: are the United States and United Kingdom different? Medical Care 2005; 43:221-228.
15. Kharroubi SA, O'Hagan A, Brazier JE. Estimating utilities from individual health state preference data: a nonparametric Bayesian approach. Applied Statistics 2005; 54:879-895.
16. Kharroubi SA, O'Hagan A, Brazier JE. Modelling covariates for the SF-6D standard gamble health state preference data using a nonparametric Bayesian method. Social Science and Medicine 2007; 64:1242-1252.
17. Kharroubi SA, McCabe C. Modelling HUI 2 health state preference data using a nonparametric Bayesian method. Medical Decision Making 2008; 28:875-887.
18. Brazier JE, Ratcliffe J, Tsuchiya A, Solomon J. Measuring and Valuing Health for Economic Evaluation. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2007.
19. Dolan P. Modeling valuation for Euroqol health states. Medical Care 1997; 35:351-363.
20. Patrick DL, Starks HE, Cain KC, Uhlmann RF, Pearlman RA. Measuring preferences for health states worse than death. Medical Decision Making 1994; 14:9-18.
21. Shaw JW, Johnson JA, Coons SJ. US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: development and testing of the D1 valuation model. Medical Care 2005; 43:203-220.