IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v43y2023i3p387-396.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficient Designs for Valuation Studies That Use Time Tradeoff (TTO) Tasks to Map Latent Utilities from Discrete Choice Experiments to the Interval Scale: Selection of Health States for TTO Tasks

Author

Listed:
  • Menglu Che

    (Department of Biostatistics, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA)

  • Eleanor Pullenayegum

    (Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada)

Abstract

Background In eliciting utilities to value multiattribute utility instruments, discrete choice experiments (DCEs) administered online are less costly than interviewer-facilitated time tradeoff (TTO) tasks. DCEs capture utilities on a latent scale and are often coupled with a small number of TTO tasks to anchor utilities to the interval scale. Given the costly nature of TTO data, design strategies that maximize value set precision per TTO response are critical. Methods Under simplifying assumptions, we expressed the mean square prediction error (MSE) of the final value set as a function of the number J of TTO-valued health states and the variance V J of the states’ latent utilities. We hypothesized that even when these assumptions do not hold, the MSE 1) decreases as V J increases while holding J fixed and 2) decreases as J increases while holding V J fixed. We used simulation to examine whether there was empirical support for our hypotheses a) assuming an underlying linear relationship between TTO and DCE utilities and b) using published results from the Dutch, US, and Indonesian EQ-5D-5L valuation studies. Results Simulation set (a) supported the hypotheses, as did simulations parameterized using valuation data from Indonesia, which showed a linear relationship between TTO and DCE utilities. The US and Dutch valuation data showed nonlinear relationships between TTO and DCE utilities and did not support the hypotheses. Specifically, for fixed J , smaller values of V J reduced rather than increased the MSE. Conclusions Given that, in practice, the underlying relationship between TTO and DCE utilities may be nonlinear, health states for TTO valuation should be placed evenly across the latent utility scale to avoid systematic bias in some regions of the scale. Highlights Valuation studies may feature a large number of respondents completing discrete choice tasks online, with a smaller number of respondents completing time tradeoff (TTO) tasks to anchor the discrete choice utilities to an interval scale. We show that having each TTO respondent complete multiple tasks rather than a single task improves value set precision. Keeping the total number of TTO respondents and the number of tasks per respondent fixed, having 20 health states directly valued through TTO leads to better predictive precision than valuing 10 health states directly. If DCE latent utilities and TTO utilities follow a perfect linear relationship, choosing the TTO states to be valued by weighting on the 2 ends of the latent utility scale leads to better predictive precision than choosing states evenly across the latent utility scale. Conversely, if DCE latent utilities and TTO utilities do not follow a linear relationship, choosing the states to be valued using TTO evenly across the latent utility scale leads to better predictive precision than weighted selection does. In the context of valuation of the EQ-5D-Y-3L, we recommend valuing 20 or more health states using TTO and placing them evenly across the latent utility scale.

Suggested Citation

  • Menglu Che & Eleanor Pullenayegum, 2023. "Efficient Designs for Valuation Studies That Use Time Tradeoff (TTO) Tasks to Map Latent Utilities from Discrete Choice Experiments to the Interval Scale: Selection of Health States for TTO Tasks," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(3), pages 387-396, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:43:y:2023:i:3:p:387-396
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X231159381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X231159381
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X231159381?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. Eleanor M. Pullenayegum & Kelvin K. W. Chan & Feng Xie, 2016. "Quantifying Parameter Uncertainty in EQ-5D-3L Value Sets and Its Impact on Studies That Use the EQ-5D-3L to Measure Health Utility," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(2), pages 223-233, February.
    2. Donna Rowen & John Brazier & Ben Van Hout, 2015. "A Comparison of Methods for Converting DCE Values onto the Full Health-Dead QALY Scale," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(3), pages 328-340, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ratcliffe, Julie & Huynh, Elisabeth & Chen, Gang & Stevens, Katherine & Swait, Joffre & Brazier, John & Sawyer, Michael & Roberts, Rachel & Flynn, Terry, 2016. "Valuing the Child Health Utility 9D: Using profile case best worst scaling methods to develop a new adolescent specific scoring algorithm," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 48-59.
    2. Menglu Che & Feng Xie & Stephanie Thomas & Eleanor Pullenayegum, 2023. "Bayesian Models with Spatial Correlation Improve the Precision of EQ-5D-5L Value Sets," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(5), pages 587-594, July.
    3. Joseph Kwon & Louise Freijser & Elisabeth Huynh & Martin Howell & Gang Chen & Kamran Khan & Shahd Daher & Nia Roberts & Conrad Harrison & Sarah Smith & Nancy Devlin & Kirsten Howard & Emily Lancsar & , 2022. "Systematic Review of Conceptual, Age, Measurement and Valuation Considerations for Generic Multidimensional Childhood Patient-Reported Outcome Measures," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 379-431, April.
    4. Osman, Ahmed M.Y. & Wu, Jing & He, Xiaoning & Chen, Gang, 2021. "Eliciting SF-6Dv2 health state utilities using an anchored best-worst scaling technique," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    5. Mina Bahrampour & Joshua Byrnes & Richard Norman & Paul A. Scuffham & Martin Downes, 2020. "Discrete choice experiments to generate utility values for multi-attribute utility instruments: a systematic review of methods," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(7), pages 983-992, September.
    6. Haode Wang & Donna L. Rowen & John E. Brazier & Litian Jiang, 2023. "Discrete Choice Experiments in Health State Valuation: A Systematic Review of Progress and New Trends," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 405-418, May.
    7. Titi Sahidah Fitriana & Bram Roudijk & Fredrick Dermawan Purba & Jan J. V. Busschbach & Elly Stolk, 2022. "Estimating an EQ-5D-Y-3L Value Set for Indonesia by Mapping the DCE onto TTO Values," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 157-167, December.
    8. Yiu, Hei Hang Edmund & Buckell, John & Petrou, Stavros & Stewart-Brown, Sarah & Madan, Jason, 2023. "Derivation of a UK preference-based value set for the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (SWEMWBS) to allow estimation of Mental Well-being Adjusted Life Years (MWALYs)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 327(C).
    9. Fanni Rencz & Gábor Ruzsa & Alex Bató & Zhihao Yang & Aureliano Paolo Finch & Valentin Brodszky, 2022. "Value Set for the EQ-5D-Y-3L in Hungary," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 205-215, December.
    10. Koonal K. Shah & Juan Manuel Ramos-Goñi & Simone Kreimeier & Nancy J. Devlin, 2020. "An exploration of methods for obtaining 0 = dead anchors for latent scale EQ-5D-Y values," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(7), pages 1091-1103, September.
    11. Ruvini M. Hettiarachchi & Sanjeewa Kularatna & Joshua Byrnes & Brendan Mulhern & Gang Chen & Paul A. Scuffham, 2023. "Valuing the Dental Caries Utility Index in Australia," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(7-8), pages 901-913, October.
    12. Samer A. Kharroubi & Yara Beyh & Esmail Abdul Fattah & Tracey Young, 2020. "The Importance of Accounting for Parameter Uncertainty in SF-6D Value Sets and Its Impact on Studies that Use the SF-6D to Measure Health Utility," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-12, June.
    13. Hsiang-Wen Lin & Chia-Ing Li & Fang- Ju Lin & Jen-Yu Chang & Churn-Shiouh Gau & Nan Luo & A Simon Pickard & Juan M Ramos Goñi & Chao-Hsiun Tang & Chien-Ning Hsu, 2018. "Valuation of the EQ-5D-5L in Taiwan," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-16, December.
    14. Edward J. D. Webb & John O’Dwyer & David Meads & Paul Kind & Penny Wright, 2020. "Transforming discrete choice experiment latent scale values for EQ-5D-3L using the visual analogue scale," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(5), pages 787-800, July.
    15. Himmler, Sebastian & Jonker, Marcel & van Krugten, Frédérique & Hackert, Mariska & van Exel, Job & Brouwer, Werner, 2022. "Estimating an anchored utility tariff for the well-being of older people measure (WOOP) for the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).

    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:43:y:2023:i:3:p:387-396. 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.