Sign up to our newsletter Subscribe
Sign up to our newsletter Subscribe
This OHE Research Paper describes a study in which four stated preference methods for anchoring EQ-5D-Y values were compared: visual analogue scale, discrete choice experiment (with a duration attribute), lag-time time trade-off, and the recently developed ‘location-of-dead’ element of the…
This OHE Research Paper describes a study in which four stated preference methods for anchoring EQ-5D-Y values were compared: visual analogue scale, discrete choice experiment (with a duration attribute), lag-time time trade-off, and the recently developed ‘location-of-dead’ element of the personal utility function (PUF) approach.
To date there have been no value sets to support the use of EQ-5D-Y (the ‘youth’ version of the EQ-5D patient-reported outcomes measure) in cost-utility analysis. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) can be used to obtain values on a latent scale, but these values require anchoring at 0 = dead to meet the conventions of quality-adjusted life year (QALY) estimation.
A new OHE Research Paper, authored by former OHE researcher Koonal Shah and OHE Senior Fellow Nancy Devlin, in collaboration with Juan Manuel Ramos-Goñi and Simone Kreimeier, compares four stated preference methods for anchoring EQ-5D-Y values: visual analogue scale, DCE (with a duration attribute), lag-time time trade-off, and the recently developed ‘location-of-dead’ (LOD) element of the personal utility function (PUF) approach. A sample of adult members of the UK general public valued both EQ-5D-3L health states from an adult perspective (considering their own health) and EQ-5D-Y health states from a child perspective (considering the health of a 10-year-old child).
Overall, respondents gave lower values under the adult perspective compared to the child perspective, with some variation across methods. Values for health state 33333 (the worst health state defined by the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-Y descriptive systems) tended to be negative for the adult perspective and close to 0 for the child perspective. The paper presents potential criteria for selecting a preferred anchoring method, and discusses the decision-making circumstances under which utilities and QALY estimates for children and adults need to be commensurate in order to achieve allocative efficiency.
Citation
Shah, K.K., Ramos-Goñi, J.M., Kreimeier, S. and Devlin, N.J., 2020. Anchoring latent scale values for the EQ-5D-Y at 0 = dead. OHE Research Paper. London: Office of Health Economics. Available at: https://www.ohe.org/publications/anchoring-latent-scale-values-eq-5d-y-0-dead
An error has occurred, please try again later.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
This website uses Google Analytics to collect anonymous information such as the number of visitors to the site, and the most popular pages.
Keeping this cookie enabled helps us to improve our website.
Please enable Strictly Necessary Cookies first so that we can save your preferences!