Mapping to Estimate Health-State Utility from Non–Preference-Based Outcome Measures: An ISPOR Good Practices for Outcomes Research Task Force Report

Value in Health

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 18-27

  Wailoo, Allan J ^a   Hernandez Alava, Monica ^a   Manca, Andrea ^b   Mejia, Aurelio ^c   Ray, Joshua ^d   Crawford, Bruce ^e   Botteman, Marc ^f   Busschbach, Jan ^g  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^c Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud   (Colombia)

^d F HOFFMANN LA ROCHE LTD   (Switzerland)

^e IQVIA   (United States)

^f PHARMERIT INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

^g ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

economic evaluation; health utility; mapping; quality of life

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; DATA ANALYSIS; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; STATISTICAL MODEL; UNCERTAINTY; ADVISORY COMMITTEE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; METHODOLOGY; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARDS; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ADVISORY COMMITTEES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 85013158179     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.006     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. [1] Weinstein, M.C., Stason, W.B., Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N Engl J Med 296 (1977), 716–721.
2. [2] The EuroQol Group. EuroQol—a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 16 (1990), 199–208.
3. [3] Brazier, J.E., Roberts, J.R., The estimation of a preference-based index from the SF-12. Med Care 42 (2004), 851–859.
4. [4] Horsman, J., Furlong, W., Feeny, D., Torrance, D., The health utilities index (HUI®): concepts, measurement properties, and applications. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 1, 2003, 54.
5. [5] National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. NICE Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. 2013, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, London.
6. [6] Lopez-Bastida, J., Oliva, J., Antoñanzas, F., et al. Spanish recommendations on economic evaluation of health technologies. Eur J Health Econ 11 (2010), 513–520.
7. [7] Choices in methods for economic evaluation. 2013. Available from: http://www.has-sante.fr/portail/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-10/choices_in_methods_for_economic_evaluation.pdf. [Accessed December 9, 2016].
8. [8] PHARMAC. Prescription for pharmacoeconomic analysis version 2.2. 2015. Available from: https://www.pharmac.govt.nz/assets/pfpa-2-2.pdf. [Accessed September 14, 2016].
9. [9] International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. Pharmacoeconomic guidelines around the world. Available from: http://www.ispor.org/PEguidelines/index.asp. [Accessed February 1, 2016].
10. [10] 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, 7, 2009, 33.
11. [11] Kearns, B., Ara, R., Wailoo, A., et al. Good practice guidelines for the use of statistical regression models in economic evaluations. Pharmacoeconomics 31 (2013), 643–652.
12. [12] Wolowacz, S.E., Briggs, A., Belozeroff, V., et al. Estimating health-state utility for economic models in clinical studies: an ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value Health 19 (2016), 704–719.
13. [13] Pennington, B., Davis, S., Mapping from the Health Assessment Questionnaire to the EQ-5D: the impact of different algorithms on cost-effectiveness results. Value Health 17 (2014), 762–771.
14. [14] Hernandez Alava, M., Wailoo, A., Wolfe, F., Michaud, K., A comparison of direct and indirect methods for the estimation of health utilities from clinical outcomes. Med Decis Making 34 (2014), 919–930.
15. [15] Devlin, N., Parkin, D., Browne, J., Using the EQ-5D as a Performance Measurement Tool in the NHS (Report No. 09/03). 2009, Department of Economics, City University London, London.
16. [16] Longworth, L., Rowen, D., NICE DSU Technical Support Document 10: the use of mapping methods to estimate health state utility values, 2011 Available from: http://www.nicedsu.org.uk/TSD%2010%20mapping%20FINAL.pdf. [Accessed December 9, 2016].
17. [17] Petrou, S., Rivero-Arias, O., Dakin, H., et al. Preferred reporting items for studies mapping onto preference-based outcome measures: the MAPS statement. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 13, 2015, 106.
18. [18] Brazier, J.E., Yang, Y., Tsuchiya, A., Rowen, D.L., A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. Eur J Health Econ 11 (2009), 215–225.
19. [19] Basu, A., Manca, A., Regression estimators for generic health-related quality of life and quality-adjusted life years. Med Decis Making 32 (2012), 56–69.
20. [20] Khan, K.A., Madan, J., Petrou, S., Lamb, S.E., Mapping between the Roland Morris Questionnaire and generic preference-based measures. Value Health 17 (2014), 686–695.
21. [21] Hernández Alava, M., Wailoo, A.J., Ara, R., Tails from the peak district: adjusted limited dependent variable mixture models of EQ-5D health state utility values. Value Health 15 (2012), 550–561.
22. [22] Acaster, S., Pinder, B., Mukuria, C., et al. Mapping the EQ-5D index from the cystic fibrosis questionnaire-revised using multiple modeling approaches. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 13, 2015, 33.
23. [23] Pullenayegum, E.M., Tarride, J., Xie, F., et al. Analysis of health utility data when some subjects attain the upper bound of 1: are Tobit and CLAD models appropriate?. Value Health 13 (2010), 487–494.
24. [24] Huang, I., Frangakis, C., Atinson, M.J., et al. Addressing ceiling effects in health status measures: a comparison of techniques applied to measures for people with HIV disease. Health Serv Res 43 (2008), 327–339.
25. [25] Hunger, M., Baumert, J., Holle, R., Analysis of SF-6D index data: is beta regression appropriate?. Value Health 14 (2011), 759–767.
26. [26] Tsuchiya, A., Brazier, J., McColl, E., Parkin, D., Deriving preference-based single indices from non-preference-based condition specific instruments: converting AQLQ into EQ5D indices. Discussion Paper, Health Economics and Decision Science, University of Sheffield, 2002.
27. [27] Wailoo, A., Hernández, M., Philips, C., et al. Modeling health state utility values in ankylosing spondylitis: comparisons of direct and indirect methods. Value Health 18 (2015), 425–431.
28. [28] Gray, A., Rivero-Arias, O., Clarke, P., Estimating the association between SF-12 responses and EQ-5D utility values by response mapping. Med Decis Making 26 (2006), 18–29.
29. [29] Conigliani, C., Manca, A., Tancredi, A., Prediction of patient-reported outcome measures via multivariate ordered probit models. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc 178 (2015), 567–591.
30. [30] Cramer, J.S., Econometric Applications of Maximum Likelihood Methods. 1986, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
31. [31] Gelman, A., Shirley, K., Inference from simulations and monitoring convergence. Steve Brooks, Andrew Gelman, Galin Jones, Meng, Xiao-Li, (eds.) Handbook of Markov Chain Monte Carlo, 2011, Chapman and Hall/CRC, Taylor and Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL, 163–174.
32. [32] Longworth, L., Yang, Y., Young, T., et al. Use of generic and condition-specific measures of health-related quality of life in NICE decision-making: a systematic review, statistical modeling and survey. Health Technol Assess 18 (2014), 1–224.
33. [33] Tosh, J., Brennan, A., Wailoo, A., Bansback, N., The Sheffield rheumatoid arthritis health economic model. Rheumatology 50:Suppl. 4 (2011), iv26–iv31.
34. [34] Bansback, N., Marra, C., Tsuchiya, A., et al. Using the Health Assessment Questionnaire to estimate preference-based single indices in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 57 (2007), 963–971.
35. [35] Wailoo, A., Hernandez Alava, M., Escobar Martinez, A., Modeling the relationship between the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index and EQ-5D. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 12, 2014, 37.
36. [36] Ara, R., Wailoo, A.J., NICE DSU Technical Support Document 12: the use of health state utility values in decision models, 2011 Available from: http://www.nicedsu.org.uk/TSD12%20Utilities%20in%20modelling%20FINAL.pdf. [Accessed December 9, 2016].
37. [37] Crott, R., Briggs, A., Mapping the QLQ-C30 quality of life cancer questionnaire to EQ-5D patient preferences. Eur J Health Econ 11 (2010), 427–434.