Comparing EQ-5D scores for comorbid health conditions estimated using 5 different methods

Medical Care

Volumn 50, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 452-459

  Ara, Roberta ^a   Brazier, John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

comorbidities; EQ 5D; health state utility values; quality of life

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; COMORBIDITY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; EQ 5D SCORE; ERROR; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SAMPLE SIZE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; UNITED KINGDOM; UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS; VALIDATION PROCESS;

COMORBIDITY; ENGLAND; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84861590738     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: 15371948     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318234a04a     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. NICE Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. 2008. London N1618. available from: http://www.nice.org.uk/media/B52/A7/TAMethods GuideUpdatedJune2008.pdf. Accessed June 2010.
2. Gold MR, Siegel JE. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Oxford University Press: London.
3. 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. (Pubitemid 126484860)
4. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation a preference-based single index measure for health from the SF-36. J Health Econ. 2002;21:271-292. (Pubitemid 34143147)
5. Horsman J, Furlong W, Feeny D, et al. The Health Utilities Index (HUI): concepts, measurement properties and applications. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;1:54.
6. Yang Y, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A, et al. Estimating a preference-based single index from the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire. Value Health. 2009;2:159-166.
7. Brazier JE, Ratcliffe J, Tsuchiya A, et al. Measuring and Valuing Health for Economic Evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.
8. Brazier J, Tsuchiya A. Preference-based condition-specific measures of health: what happens to cross programme comparability? Health Econ. 2010;19:125-129.
9. Green C, Brazier JE, Deverill M. Valuing health-related quality of life: a review of health state valuation techniques. Pharmacoeconomics. 2000;17:151-165. (Pubitemid 30148812)
10. McPherson K, Myers J, Taylor WJ, et al. Self-valuation and societal valuations of health state differ with disease severity in chronic and disabling conditions. Med Care. 2004;2:1143-1151. (Pubitemid 39472121)
11. Bansback N, Ara R, Ward S, et al. Statin therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: a cost-effectiveness and value-of-information analysis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27:25-37. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200927010-00004.
12. Hu B, Fu AZ. Predicting utility for joint health states, a general framework and a new nonparametric estimator. Med Decis Making. 2010;30:E29-E39.
13. Basu A, Dale W, Elstein A, et al. A linear index for predicting joint health state utilities from single health state utilities. Health Econ. 2009;18:403-419.
14. Janssen M, Bonsel G. Estimating preference weights for chronic multimorbidity: don't add, multiply. Proceedings of the EuroQol Group. 2008. http://www.euroqol.org/. Accessed June 2010.
15. Flanagan W, McIntosh C, Le Petit C, et al. Deriving utility scores for co-morbid conditions: a test of the multiplicative model for combining individual condition scores. Popul Health Met. 2006;4. doi:10.1186/1478-7954-4- 13. (Pubitemid 44742628)
16. Fu A, Katan M. Utilities should not be multiplied. Med Care. 2008;46:984-990.
17. Ara R, Brazier J, The issues involved in populating an economic model with utility values: moving towards better practice. 2010 HEDS Discussion Paper No. 09/11. Available at http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/scharr/sections/heds/dps- 2009.html.
18. Keeney RL, Raifa H. The multiplicative utility function. Decisions With Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1993:288-292. http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/ item1143406/?site-locale=en-GB.
19. Keeney RL, Rafia H. Decision Making with Multiple Objectives. New York: Wiley; 1976.
20. Tversky A, Kaheman D. Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertainty. 1992;5:297-323.
21. Fryback DG, Lawrence WF. Dollars may not buy as man QALYs as we think: a problem with defining quality of life adjustments. Med Decis Making. 1997;17:276.
22. Manuel DG, Schultz SE, Kopec JA. Measuring the health burden of chronic disease and injury using health adjusted life expectancy and the Health Utilities Index. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002;56:843-850. (Pubitemid 35178147)
23. Ara R, Brazier J. Using health state utility values from the general population to approximate baselines in decision analytic models when condition specific data are not available. Value in Health. 2011;14:539-545.
24. National Centre for Social Research and University College London. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Health Survey for England, 2006 [computer file]. 3rd ed. Colchester, Essex: UK: Data Archive [distributor] 2010SN: 5809.
25. National Centre for Social Research and University College London. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Health Survey for England, 2005 [computer file]. 2nd ed. Colchester, Essex: UK:Data Archive [distributor], 2010SN: 5675.
26. National Centre for Social Research and University College London. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Health Survey for England, 2004 [computer file]. 2nd ed. Colchester, Essex: UK:Data Archive [distributor], 2010SN: 5439.
27. National Centre for Social Research and University College London. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Health Survey for England, 2003 [computer file]. 2nd ed. Colchester, Essex: UK:Data Archive [distributor] 2010SN: 5098.
28. Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D SF-6D. Qual Life Res. 2005;14:1423-1432.
29. Luo N, Johnson JA, Coons SJ. Using instrument-defined health state transitions to estimate minimally important differences for four preference-based health-related quality of life instruments. Med Care. 2010;48:365-371.