Comparing and explaining differences in the magnitude, content, and sensitivity of utilities predicted by the EQ-5D, SF-6D, HUI 3, 15D, QWB, and AQoL-8D multiattribute utility instruments

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 276-291

  Richardson, Jeff ^a   Khan, Munir A ^a   Iezzi, Angelo ^a   Maxwell, Aimee ^a  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

cost utility analysis; economic evaluation; multiattribute utility; utility measurement

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CHRONIC DISEASE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PSYCHOLOGY; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARDS; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CHRONIC DISEASE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84924978277     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14543107     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Richardson J, McKie J, Bariola E Encyclopedia of Health Economics. Culyer AJ, ed. San Diego (CA): Elsevier Science ; 2014: 341-57.
2. Nord E, Richardson J, Macarounas-Kirchmann K. Social evaluation of health care versus personal evaluation of health states. Int J Technol Assess. 1993 ; 9 (4). 463-78
3. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Gold MR Siegel JE Russell LB Weinstein M, ed. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press ; 1996 :
4. Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Day NA. A comparison of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) with four other generic utility instruments. Ann Med. 2001 ; 33: 358-70
5. Fryback DG, Palta M, Cherepanov D, Bolt D, Kim J. Comparison of 5 health related quality of life indexes using item response theory analysis. Med Decis Making. 2010 ; 30 (1). 5-15
6. McDonough CM, Grove MR, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Hilibrand AS. Comparison of EQ-5D, HUI, and SF-36-derived societal health state values among Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) participants. Qual Life Res. 2005 ; 14: 1321-32
7. Moock J, Kohlmann T. Comparing preference-based quality-of-life measures: results from rehabilitation patients with musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, or psychosomatic disorders. Qual Life Res. 2008 ; 17: 485-95
8. Drummond M, Brixner D, Gold M, Kind P, McGuire A, Nord E. Toward a consensus on the QALY. Value Health. 2009 ; 12 (1). S31 - S5
9. Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Salomon J, Tsuchiya A Measuring and Valuing Health Benefits for Economic Evaluation. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press ; 2007 :
10. World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability and health. http://apps.who.int/classifications/icfbrowser/
11. 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
12. Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance G, et al. Multi attribute and single attribute utility functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 System. Med Care. 2002 ; 40 (2). 113-28
13. Sintonen H, Pekurinen M Quality of Life Assessment. Walker S Rosser R, ed. Dordrecht (The Netherlands): Kluwer Academic Publishers ; 1993 :
14. Kaplan R, Bush J, Berry C. Health status: types of validity and the index of wellbeing. Health Serv Res. 1976 ; 11 (4). 478-507
15. RichardsonJSinhaKIezziAKhanMA. Modelling utility weights for the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) 8D. Qual Life Res. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11136-014-0686-8#page-1
16. RabinROemarMOppeMJanssenBHerdmanM. EQ-5D-5L user guide: basic information on how to use the EQ-5D-5L instrument. http://www.euroqol.org/fileadmin/user-upload/Documenten/PDF/Folders-Flyers/UserGuide-EQ-5D-5L-v2.0-October-2013.pdf
17. van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng Y, et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health. 2012 ; 15: 708-15
18. van Hout B, Krabbe P, Kind P, Mulhern B. Innovative responses to methodological challenges (Slide 10). Presented at ISPOR 2011, Workshop Valuing Health in Economic Evaluations ; 2011 ; 2011..
19. Ware J, Sherbourne D. The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), I: conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992 ; 30 (6). 473-83
20. Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S. The Satisfaction With Life Scale. J Pers Assess. 1985 ; 49 (1). 71-5
21. OECD guidelines on measuring subjective well-being. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264191655-en
22. Richardson J, Iezzi A, Khan MA, Maxwell A Cross-National Comparison of Twelve Quality of Life Instruments: MIC Paper 1: Background, Questions, Instruments, Research Paper 76. Melbourne (Australia): Centre for Health Economics, Monash University ; 2012 :
23. TofallisC. Model fitting for multiple variables by minimising the geometric mean deviation. In: Van HuffelSLemmerlingP, eds. Total Least Squares and Errors-In-Variables Modeling: Algorithms, Analysis and Applications. Kluwer Academic. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1077322
24. Richardson J, Elsworth G, Iezzi A, et al Increasing the Sensitivity of the AQoL Inventory for Evaluation of Interventions Affecting Mental Health, Research Paper 61. Melbourne (Australia): Centre for Health Economics, Monash University ; 2011 :
25. Lohr K, Skillman S. Glossary: health outcomes methodology. Med Care. 2000 ; 38: II-7 - II-13
26. Richardson J, Khan MA, Iezzi A, Maxwell A Melbourne (Australia): Centre for Health Economics, Monash University ; 2012 :
27. Simmons CA, Lehmann P New York: Springer ; 2013 :
28. EuroQoL Group. EQ-5D products: EuroQoL Group. http://www.euroqol.org/about-eq-5d/valuation-of-eq-5d/eq-5d-5l-value-sets.html
29. Nord E. Health state values from multiattribute utility instruments need correction. Ann Med. 2001 ; 33: 371-4