IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v22y2021i5d10.1007_s10198-021-01287-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping PedsQL™ Generic Core Scales to EQ-5D-3L utility scores in transfusion-dependent thalassemia patients

Author

Listed:
  • Asrul Akmal Shafie

    (Universiti Sains Malaysia
    Universiti Sains Malaysia)

  • Irwinder Kaur Chhabra

    (Universiti Sains Malaysia
    Sabah Women and Children’s Hospital, Ministry of Health Malaysia)

  • Jacqueline Hui Yi Wong

    (Universiti Sains Malaysia
    Hospital Kuala Lumpur, Ministry of Health Malaysia)

  • Noor Syahireen Mohammed

    (Universiti Sains Malaysia
    Hospital Sultanah Bahiyah, Ministry of Health Malaysia)

Abstract

Purpose To develop a mapping algorithm for generating EQ-5D-3L utility scores from the PedsQL Generic Core Scales (PedsQL GCS) in patients with transfusion-dependent thalassemia (TDT). Methods The algorithm was developed using data from 345 TDT patients. Spearman’s rank correlation was used to evaluate the conceptual overlap between the instruments. Model specifications were chosen using a stepwise regression. Both direct and response mapping methods were attempted. Six mapping estimation methods ordinary least squares (OLS), a log-transformed response using OLS, generalized linear model (GLM), two-part model (TPM), Tobit and multinomial logistic regression (MLOGIT) were tested to determine the root mean squared error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE). Other criterion used were accuracy of the predicted utility score, proportions of absolute differences that was less than 0.03 and intraclass correlation coefficient. An in-sample, leave-one-out cross validation was conducted to test the generalizability of each model. Results The best performing model was specified with three out of the four PedsQL GCS scales—the physical, emotional and social functioning score. The best performing estimation method for direct mapping was a GLM with a RMSE of 0.1273 and MAE of 0.1016, while the best estimation method for response mapping was the MLOGIT with a RMSE of 0.1597 and MAE of 0.0826. Conclusion The mapping algorithm developed using the GLM would facilitate the calculation of utility scores to inform economic evaluations for TDT patients when EQ-5D data is not available. However, caution should be exercised when using this algorithm in patients who have poor quality of life.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:22:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s10198-021-01287-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-021-01287-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-021-01287-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-021-01287-z?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Ottoni Wilhelm, 2008. "Practical Considerations for Choosing Between Tobit and SCLS or CLAD Estimators for Censored Regression Models with an Application to Charitable Giving," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(4), pages 559-582, August.
    2. Clara Mukuria & Donna Rowen & Sue Harnan & Andrew Rawdin & Ruth Wong & Roberta Ara & John Brazier, 2019. "An Updated Systematic Review of Studies Mapping (or Cross-Walking) Measures of Health-Related Quality of Life to Generic Preference-Based Measures to Generate Utility Values," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 295-313, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Stavros Petrou & Oliver Rivero-Arias & Helen Dakin & Louise Longworth & Mark Oppe & Robert Froud & Alastair Gray, 2015. "Preferred Reporting Items for Studies Mapping onto Preference-Based Outcome Measures: The MAPS Statement," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(6), pages 1-8, August.
    5. Stavros Petrou & Oliver Rivero-Arias & Helen Dakin & Louise Longworth & Mark Oppe & Robert Froud & Alastair Gray, 2015. "The MAPS Reporting Statement for Studies Mapping onto Generic Preference-Based Outcome Measures: Explanation and Elaboration," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(10), pages 993-1011, October.
    6. Christine Mpundu-Kaambwa & Gang Chen & Remo Russo & Katherine Stevens & Karin Dam Petersen & Julie Ratcliffe, 2017. "Mapping CHU9D Utility Scores from the PedsQLTM 4.0 SF-15," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 453-467, April.
    7. John Brazier & Yaling Yang & Aki Tsuchiya & Donna Rowen, 2010. "A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 11(2), pages 215-225, April.
    8. Tosin Lambe & Emma Frew & Natalie J. Ives & Rebecca L. Woolley & Carole Cummins & Elizabeth A. Brettell & Emma N. Barsoum & Nicholas J. A. Webb, 2018. "Mapping the Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL™) Generic Core Scales onto the Child Health Utility Index–9 Dimension (CHU-9D) Score for Economic Evaluation in Children," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 451-465, April.
    9. Kamran Khan & Stavros Petrou & Oliver Rivero-Arias & Stephen Walters & Spencer Boyle, 2014. "Mapping EQ-5D Utility Scores from the PedsQL™ Generic Core Scales," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(7), pages 693-706, July.
    10. Nicholas Mitsakakis & Karen E. Bremner & George Tomlinson & Murray Krahn, 2020. "Exploring the Benefits of Transformations in Health Utility Mapping," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 40(2), pages 183-197, February.
    11. Asrul Akmal Shafie & Annushiah Vasan Thakumar, 2020. "Multiplicative modelling of EQ-5D-3L TTO and VAS values," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(9), pages 1411-1420, December.
    12. Emma Frew & Tosin Lambe, 2018. "Comment on: “Mapping the Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL™) Generic Core Scales Onto the Child Health Utility Index-9 Dimension (CHU-9D) Score for Economic Evaluation in Children”," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(8), pages 1029-1029, August.
    13. Federico Belotti & Partha Deb & Willard G. Manning & Edward C. Norton, 2015. "twopm: Two-part models," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 15(1), pages 3-20, March.
    14. Weinstein, Milton C., 1988. "A QALY is a QALY is a QALY -- Or is it?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 289-290, September.
    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. Chris Sampson;Martina Garau, 2019. "How Should We Measure Quality of Life Impact in Rare Disease? Recent Learnings in Spinal Muscular Atrophy," Briefing 002146, Office of Health Economics.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Carlos King Ho Wong & Prudence Wing Hang Cheung & Dino Samartzis & Keith Dip-Kei Luk & Kenneth M C Cheung & Cindy Lo Kuen Lam & Jason Pui Yin Cheung, 2017. "Mapping the SRS-22r questionnaire onto the EQ-5D-5L utility score in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-12, April.
    5. Admassu N. Lamu, 2020. "Does linear equating improve prediction in mapping? Crosswalking MacNew onto EQ-5D-5L value sets," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(6), pages 903-915, August.
    6. Jeff Round & Mike Paulden, 2018. "Incorporating equity in economic evaluations: a multi-attribute equity state approach," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(4), pages 489-498, May.
    7. Stavros Petrou & Oliver Rivero-Arias & Helen Dakin & Louise Longworth & Mark Oppe & Robert Froud & Alastair Gray, 2015. "Preferred Reporting Items for Studies Mapping onto Preference-Based Outcome Measures: The MAPS Statement," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(6), pages 1-8, August.
    8. Aileen R. Neilson & Gareth T. Jones & Gary J. Macfarlane & Ejaz MI Pathan & Paul McNamee, 2022. "Generating EQ-5D-5L health utility scores from BASDAI and BASFI: a mapping study in patients with axial spondyloarthritis using longitudinal UK registry data," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(8), pages 1357-1369, November.
    9. Krishnakumar Thankappan & Tejal Patel & Krishna Kollamparambil Ajithkumar & Deepak Balasubramanian & Manu Raj & Sujha Subramanian & Subramania Iyer, 2022. "Mapping of head and neck cancer patient concerns inventory scores on to Euroqol-Five Dimensions-Five Levels (EQ-5D-5L) health utility scores," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(2), pages 225-235, March.
    10. Fabienne Abadie & Christian Boehler, 2015. "Monitoring and Assessment Framework for the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (MAFEIP) - Conceptual description of the Monitoring and Assessment Framework for the EIP on AHA," JRC Research Reports JRC96205, Joint Research Centre.
    11. Christine Mpundu-Kaambwa & Gang Chen & Elisabeth Huynh & Remo Russo & Julie Ratcliffe, 2019. "Mapping the PedsQL™ onto the CHU9D: An Assessment of External Validity in a Large Community-Based Sample," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(9), pages 1139-1153, September.
    12. Michael J. Zoratti & A. Simon Pickard & Peep F. M. Stalmeier & Daniel Ollendorf & Andrew Lloyd & Kelvin K W Chan & Don Husereau & John E. Brazier & Murray Krahn & Mitchell Levine & Lehana Thabane & Fe, 2021. "Evaluating the conduct and application of health utility studies: a review of critical appraisal tools and reporting checklists," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(5), pages 723-733, July.
    13. Sun Sun & Erik Stenberg & Yang Cao & Lars Lindholm & Klas-Göran Salén & Karl A. Franklin & Nan Luo, 2023. "Mapping the obesity problems scale to the SF-6D: results based on the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry (SOReg)," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(2), pages 279-292, March.
    14. 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.
    15. Ben F. M. Wijnen & Iris Mosweu & Marian H. J. M. Majoie & Leone Ridsdale & Reina J. A. Kinderen & Silvia M. A. A. Evers & Paul McCrone, 2018. "A comparison of the responsiveness of EQ-5D-5L and the QOLIE-31P and mapping of QOLIE-31P to EQ-5D-5L in epilepsy," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(6), pages 861-870, July.
    16. Koonal K. Shah & Bryan Bennett & Andrew Lenny & Louise Longworth & John E. Brazier & Mark Oppe & A. Simon Pickard & James W. Shaw, 2021. "Adapting preference-based utility measures to capture the impact of cancer treatment-related symptoms," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(8), pages 1301-1309, November.
    17. Turner, Alex J. & Fichera, Eleonora & Sutton, Matt, 2022. "Estimating the late-life effects of social and emotional skills in childhood using midlife mediators," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    18. Brown, Sarah & Greene, William H. & Harris, Mark N. & Taylor, Karl, 2015. "An inverse hyperbolic sine heteroskedastic latent class panel tobit model: An application to modelling charitable donations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 228-236.
    19. Hougaard, Jens Leth & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Østerdal, Lars Peter, 2013. "A new axiomatic approach to the evaluation of population health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 515-523.
    20. Round, Jeff, 2012. "Is a QALY still a QALY at the end of life?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 521-527.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Mapping algorithm; PedsQL; EQ-5D-3L; Utility scores; Quality of life; Thalassemia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:eujhec:v:22:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s10198-021-01287-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.