IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v34y2014i7p919-930.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparison of Direct and Indirect Methods for the Estimation of Health Utilities from Clinical Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Mónica Hernández Alava
  • Allan Wailoo
  • Fred Wolfe
  • Kaleb Michaud

Abstract

Background : Analysts frequently estimate health state utility values from other outcomes. Utility values like EQ-5D have characteristics that make standard statistical methods inappropriate. We have developed a bespoke, mixture model approach to directly estimate EQ-5D. An indirect method, “response mapping,†first estimates the level on each of the 5 dimensions of the EQ-5D and then calculates the expected tariff score. These methods have never previously been compared. Methods : We use a large observational database from patients with rheumatoid arthritis ( N = 100,398). Direct estimation of UK EQ-5D scores as a function of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), pain, and age was performed with a limited dependent variable mixture model. Indirect modeling was undertaken with a set of generalized ordered probit models with expected tariff scores calculated mathematically. Linear regression was reported for comparison purposes. Impact on cost-effectiveness was demonstrated with an existing model. Results : The linear model fits poorly, particularly at the extremes of the distribution. The bespoke mixture model and the indirect approaches improve fit over the entire range of EQ-5D. Mean average error is 10% and 5% lower compared with the linear model, respectively. Root mean squared error is 3% and 2% lower. The mixture model demonstrates superior performance to the indirect method across almost the entire range of pain and HAQ. These lead to differences in cost-effectiveness of up to 20%. Conclusions : There are limited data from patients in the most severe HAQ health states. Modeling of EQ-5D from clinical measures is best performed directly using the bespoke mixture model. This substantially outperforms the indirect method in this example. Linear models are inappropriate, suffer from systematic bias, and generate values outside the feasible range.

Suggested Citation

  • Mónica Hernández Alava & Allan Wailoo & Fred Wolfe & Kaleb Michaud, 2014. "A Comparison of Direct and Indirect Methods for the Estimation of Health Utilities from Clinical Outcomes," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 34(7), pages 919-930, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:34:y:2014:i:7:p:919-930
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X13500720
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X13500720
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X13500720?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goffe, William L. & Ferrier, Gary D. & Rogers, John, 1994. "Global optimization of statistical functions with simulated annealing," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1-2), pages 65-99.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael Falk Hvidberg & Mónica Hernández Alava, 2023. "Catalogues of EQ-5D-3L Health-Related Quality of Life Scores for 199 Chronic Conditions and Health Risks for Use in the UK and the USA," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 41(10), pages 1287-1388, October.
    2. Asrul Akmal Shafie & Irwinder Kaur Chhabra & Jacqueline Hui Yi Wong & Noor Syahireen Mohammed, 2021. "Mapping PedsQL™ Generic Core Scales to EQ-5D-3L utility scores in transfusion-dependent thalassemia patients," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(5), pages 735-747, July.
    3. Kailu Wang & Xiaopeng Guo & Siyue Yu & Lu Gao & Zihao Wang & Huijuan Zhu & Bing Xing & Shuyang Zhang & Dong Dong, 2021. "Mapping of the acromegaly quality of life questionnaire to ED-5D-5L index score among patients with acromegaly," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(9), pages 1381-1391, December.
    4. Fan Yang & Carlos K. H. Wong & Nan Luo & James Piercy & Rebecca Moon & James Jackson, 2019. "Mapping the kidney disease quality of life 36-item short form survey (KDQOL-36) to the EQ-5D-3L and the EQ-5D-5L in patients undergoing dialysis," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(8), pages 1195-1206, November.
    5. Mona Aghdaee & Bonny Parkinson & Kompal Sinha & Yuanyuan Gu & Rajan Sharma & Emma Olin & Henry Cutler, 2022. "An examination of machine learning to map non‐preference based patient reported outcome measures to health state utility values," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(8), pages 1525-1557, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas Baudin & Robert Stelter, 2022. "The rural exodus and the rise of Europe," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 365-414, September.
    2. Luca Benati & Paolo Surico, 2009. "VAR Analysis and the Great Moderation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1636-1652, September.
    3. Asgharian, Hossein & Hess, Wolfgang & Liu, Lu, 2013. "A spatial analysis of international stock market linkages," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 4738-4754.
    4. Luca Benati & Paolo Surico, 2008. "Evolving U.S. Monetary Policy and The Decline of Inflation Predictability," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 6(2-3), pages 634-646, 04-05.
    5. John M. Abowd & Francis Kramarz & Sébastien Pérez-Duarte & Ian M. Schmutte, 2018. "Sorting Between and Within Industries: A Testable Model of Assortative Matching," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 129, pages 1-32.
    6. Jason Matthew DeBacker, 2015. "Flip‐Flopping: Ideological Adjustment Costs In The United States Senate," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 53(1), pages 108-128, January.
    7. Luca Benati & Pierpaolo Benigno, 2023. "Gibson s Paradox and the Natural Rate of Interest," Diskussionsschriften dp2303, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    8. Haan, Peter & Prowse, Victoria L., 2010. "The Design of Unemployment Transfers: Evidence from a Dynamic Structural Life-Cycle Model," IZA Discussion Papers 4792, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Dufour, Jean-Marie, 2006. "Monte Carlo tests with nuisance parameters: A general approach to finite-sample inference and nonstandard asymptotics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 443-477, August.
    10. Green, Rikard & Larsson, Karl & Lunina, Veronika & Nilsson, Birger, 2018. "Cross-commodity news transmission and volatility spillovers in the German energy markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 231-243.
    11. Kapetanios, George & Marcellino, Massimiliano & Papailias, Fotis, 2016. "Forecasting inflation and GDP growth using heuristic optimisation of information criteria and variable reduction methods," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 369-382.
    12. Roman Sustek, 2011. "Monetary Business Cycle Accounting," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 14(4), pages 592-612, October.
    13. Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2002. "Inverse probability weighted M-estimators for sample selection, attrition and stratification," CeMMAP working papers 11/02, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    14. Martin Andreasen, 2010. "How to Maximize the Likelihood Function for a DSGE Model," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 35(2), pages 127-154, February.
    15. Max Jerrell, 2000. "Applications Of Public Global Optimization Software To Difficult Econometric Functions," Computing in Economics and Finance 2000 161, Society for Computational Economics.
    16. Robert G. King & Alexander Wolman & Michael Dotsey, 2009. "Inflation and Real Activity with Firm Level Productivity Shocks," 2009 Meeting Papers 367, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    17. Terasvirta, Timo, 2006. "Forecasting economic variables with nonlinear models," Handbook of Economic Forecasting, in: G. Elliott & C. Granger & A. Timmermann (ed.), Handbook of Economic Forecasting, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 413-457, Elsevier.
    18. Deb, Partha & Trivedi, Pravin K., 2002. "The structure of demand for health care: latent class versus two-part models," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 601-625, July.
    19. Catherine Kyrtsou & Michel Terraza, 2003. "Is it Possible to Study Chaotic and ARCH Behaviour Jointly? Application of a Noisy Mackey–Glass Equation with Heteroskedastic Errors to the Paris Stock Exchange Returns Series," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 21(3), pages 257-276, June.
    20. Pudney, Stephen, 2011. "Perception and retrospection: The dynamic consistency of responses to survey questions on wellbeing," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 300-310.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:34:y:2014:i:7:p:919-930. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.