Preferred Reporting Items for Studies Mapping onto Preference-Based Outcome Measures: The MAPS Statement

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 35, Issue 6, 2015, Pages NP1-NP8

  Petrou, Stavros ^a   Rivero Arias, Oliver ^b   Dakin, Helen ^b   Longworth, Louise ^c   Oppe, Mark ^d   Froud, Robert ^a,e   Gray, Alastair ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^c BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^d EuroQol Research Foundation   (Netherlands)

^e Høyskolen Kristiania   (Norway)

Author keywords

mapping; outcome measures; preferences; reporting

Indexed keywords

EID: 84938776223     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X15598332     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Brazier JE, Yang Y, Tsuchiya A, Rowen DL,. A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. Eur J Health Econ. 2010; 11: 215-25.
2. Dakin H,. Review of studies mapping from quality of life or clinical measures to EQ-5D: an online database. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013; 11: 151.
3. Chuang LH, Whitehead SJ,. Mapping for economic evaluation. Br Med Bull. 2012; 101: 1-15.
4. Longworth L, Rowen D,. NICE DSU Technical Support Document 10: The Use of Mapping Methods to Estimate Health State Utility Values. Sheffield, UK: Decision Support Unit, ScHARR, University of Sheffield; 2011.
5. Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG,. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med. 2010; 7: e1000217.
6. Moher D, Simera I, Schulz KF, Hoey J, Altman DG,. Helping editors, peer reviewers and authors improve the clarity, completeness and transparency of reporting health research. BMC Medicine. 2008; 6: 13.
7. Narahari SR, Ryan TJ, Aggithaya MG, Bose KS, Prasanna KS,. Evidence-based approaches for the ayurvedic traditional herbal formulations: toward an ayurvedic consort model. J Altern Complement Med. 2008; 14: 769-76.
8. Mortimer D, Segal L, Sturm J,. Can we derive an "exchange rate" between descriptive and preference-based outcome measures for stroke? Results from the transfer to utility (TTU) technique. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009; 7: 33.
9. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE,. Standards for reporting of diagnostic A: the Stard statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2003; 138: W1-12.
10. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J,. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (coreq): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007; 19: 349-57.
11. Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG,. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2007; 4: e297.
12. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J,. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009; 62: e1-34.
13. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF,. Consort 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010; 340: c869.
14. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S,. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS)-explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR health economic evaluation publication guidelines good reporting practices task force. Value Health. 2013; 16: 231-50.
15. Fitch K, Bernstein S, Aguilar M,. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User's Manual. Santa Monica, CA: RAND; 2001.
16. Petrou S, Rivero-Arias O, Dakin H,. The maps reporting statement for studies mapping onto generic preference-based outcome measures: explanation and elaboration. Pharmacoeconomics. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-015-0312-9
17. 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.
18. Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M, Torrance GW,. Multi-attribute health status classification systems. Health utilities index. Pharmacoeconomics. 1995; 7: 490-502.
19. Yang Y, Wong MY, Lam CL, Wong CK,. Improving the mapping of condition-specific health-related quality of life onto SF-6D score. Qual Life Res. 2014; 23: 2343-53.
20. Lee L, Kaneva P, Latimer E, Feldman LS,. Mapping the gastrointestinal quality of life index to short-form 6D utility scores. J Surg Res. 2014; 186: 135-41.
21. Roset M, Badia X, Forsythe A, Webb SM,. Mapping cushingqol scores onto SF-6D utility values in patients with Cushing's syndrome. Patient. 2013; 6: 103-11.
22. Payakachat N, Tilford JM, Kuhlthau KA,. Predicting health utilities for children with autism spectrum disorders. Autism Res. 2014; 7: 649-63.
23. Goldfeld KS, Hamel MB, Mitchell SL,. Mapping health status measures to a utility measure in a study of nursing home residents with advanced dementia. Med Care. 2012; 50: 446-51.
24. Chen G, McKie J, Khan MA, Richardson JR,. Deriving health utilities from the macnew heart disease quality of life questionnaire. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2014. DOI: 10.1177/1474515114536096
25. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L, Group C,. Use of the consort statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation. JAMA. 2001; 285: 1992-5.
26. Delaney A, Bagshaw SM, Ferland A, Manns B, Laupland KB, Doig CJ,. A systematic evaluation of the quality of meta-analyses in the critical care literature. Critical care. 2005; 9: R575-82.
27. Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A,. Does the consort checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust. 2006; 185: 263-7.