Estimating preference-based single index measures for dementia using DEMQOL and DEMQOL-proxy

Value in Health

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 346-356

  Rowen, Donna ^a   Mulhern, Brendan ^a   Banerjee, Sube ^b   Van Hout, Ben ^a   Young, Tracey A ^a   Knapp, Martin ^b,c   Smith, Sarah C ^d   Lamping, Donna L ^d   Brazier, John E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^b KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

^d LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

dementia; health related quality of life; preference based measures of health; quality adjusted life years; utilities

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEMENTIA; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; DEMENTIA; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PROXY; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; QUESTIONNAIRES; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; VALUE OF LIFE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84863338047     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.10.016     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997; 35:1095-108. (Pubitemid 127453463)
2. Torrance GW, Feeny DH, Furlong WJ, et al. Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system: health utilities index mark 2. Med Care 1996;34:702-22. (Pubitemid 126433265)
3. Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW, et al. Multiattribute and singleattribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Med Care 2002;40:113-28.
4. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002;21:271-92. (Pubitemid 34143147)
5. Brazier JE, Roberts J. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Med Care 2004;42:851-9. (Pubitemid 39456916)
6. Espallargues M, Czoski-Murray CJ, Bansback NJ, et al. The impact of age-related macular degeneration on health status utility values. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005;46:4016-23. (Pubitemid 44264600)
7. Barton GR, Bankart J, Davis AC, Summerfield QA. Comparing utility scores before and after hearing-aid provision: results according to the EQ-5D, HUI3 and SF-6D. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2004;3: 103-5. (Pubitemid 41018308)
8. Neumann PJ. Health utilities in Alzheimer's disease and implications for cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics 2005;23:537- 41.
9. Smith SC, Lamping DL, Banerjee S, et al. Development of a new measure of health-related quality of life for people with dementia: DEMQOL. Psychol Med 2007;37:737-46. (Pubitemid 46511098)
10. Coucill W, Bryan S, Bentham P, et al. ED-5D in patients with dementia. Med Care 2001;8:760-71.
11. Smith SC, Lamping DL, Banerjee S, et al. Measurement of healthrelated quality of life for people with dementia: development of a new instrument (DEMQOL) and an evaluation of current methodology. Health Technol Assess 2005;9:1-93.
12. National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence, 2008.
13. Yang Y, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A, Young T. Estimating a preference-based index for a 5-dimensional health state classification for asthma derived from the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire. Med Decis Making 2011;31:281-91.
14. Young T, Yang Y, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A. The use of Rasch analysis in reducing a large condition-specific instrument for preference valuation: the case of moving from AQLQ to AQL-5D. Med Decis Making 2011;31:195-210.
15. Rowen D, Brazier J, Young T, et al. Deriving a preference-based measure for cancer using the EORTC QLQ-C30. Value Health 2011;14:721-31.
16. Mavranezouli I, Brazier J, Young A, Barkham M. Using Rasch analysis to form plausible health states amenable to valuation: the development of the CORE-6D from a measure of common mental health problems (CORE-OM). Qual Life Res 2011;20:321-33.
17. Yang Y, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A, Coyne K. Estimating a preference-based single index from the overactive bladder questionnaire. Value Health 2009;12:159-66.
18. Young T, Yang Y, Brazier JE, et al. The first stage of developing preference-based measures: constructing a health-state classification using Rasch analysis. Qual Life Res 2009;18:253-65.
19. Brazier JE, Czoski-Murray C, Roberts J, et al. Estimation of a preference-based index from a condition-specific measure: the King's health questionnaire. Med Decis Making 2008;28:113-26.
20. Mulhern B, Smith SC, Rowen D, et al. Improving the measurement of QALYs in dementia: developing patient- and carer-reported health state classification systems using Rasch analysis. Value Health. In press.
21. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence, 2004.
22. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
23. Rowen D, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A, et al. It's all in the name, or is it? The impact of labelling on health state values. Med Decis Making. In press.
24. Kind P, Hardman G, Macran S. UK Population Norms for EQ-5D. Centre for Health Economics Discussion Paper Series, York, UK: University of York; 1999.
25. Brazier J, Rowen D, Tsuchiya A, et al. The impact of adding an extra dimension to a preference-based measure. Social Sci Med 2011;73: 245-53.
26. Brazier J, Tsuchiya A. Preference-based condition-specific measures of health: what happens to cross programme comparability? Health Econ 2010;19:125-9.
27. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Guidance for Industry: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. Silver Spring, Maryland: Food and Drug Administration, 2009.
28. Young T, Yang Y, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A. The use of Rasch analysis in reducing a large condition-specific instrument for preference valuation: the case of moving from AQLQ to AQL-5D. Med Decis Making 2011;31:195-210.