IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v11y2018i1d10.1007_s40271-017-0259-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting EuroQoL 5 Dimensions 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utilities from Older People’s Quality of Life Brief Questionnaire (OPQoL-Brief) Scores

Author

Listed:
  • Billingsley Kaambwa

    (Flinders University)

  • Julie Ratcliffe

    (University of South Australia Business School)

Abstract

Background and Objective Economic evaluation of healthcare treatment and services targeted at older people requires measurement of utility-based quality-of-life outcomes but it is not always possible to collect such outcome data. It may, however, be possible to estimate these outcomes using non-utility measures of quality of life where the latter have been collected. The objective of this study was to develop a regression-based algorithm to map a non-utility-based outcome, the Older People’s Quality of Life brief questionnaire (OPQoL-brief), onto a utility-based outcome, the EuroQoL 5 Dimensions 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L). Methods The estimation sample comprised 330 community-based Australian older people (>65 years), while the validation sample consisted of 293 older people from a separate study. Six regression techniques were employed to estimate utilities from OPQoL-brief. The predictive accuracy of 54 regression models (six regression techniques × nine model specifications) was assessed using six criteria: mean absolute error (MAE), root mean squared error (RMSE), correlation, distribution of predicted utilities, distribution of residuals, and proportion of predictions with absolute errors

Suggested Citation

  • Billingsley Kaambwa & Julie Ratcliffe, 2018. "Predicting EuroQoL 5 Dimensions 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utilities from Older People’s Quality of Life Brief Questionnaire (OPQoL-Brief) Scores," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(1), pages 39-54, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:11:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s40271-017-0259-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-017-0259-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-017-0259-3
    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/s40271-017-0259-3?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. Drummond, Michael F. & Sculpher, Mark J. & Torrance, George W. & O'Brien, Bernie J. & Stoddart, Greg L., 2005. "Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 3, number 9780198529453.
    2. Tsuchiya, A & Brazier, J & McColl, E & Parkin, D, 2002. "Deriving preference-based single indices from non-preference based condition-specific instruments: converting AQLQ into EQ5D indices," MPRA Paper 29740, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Kaambwa, Billingsley & Lancsar, Emily & McCaffrey, Nicola & Chen, Gang & Gill, Liz & Cameron, Ian D. & Crotty, Maria & Ratcliffe, Julie, 2015. "Investigating consumers' and informal carers' views and preferences for consumer directed care: A discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 81-94.
    4. Briggs, Andrew & Sculpher, Mark & Claxton, Karl, 2006. "Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198526629.
    5. Billingsley Kaambwa & Gang Chen & Julie Ratcliffe & Angelo Iezzi & Aimee Maxwell & Jeff Richardson, 2017. "Mapping Between the Sydney Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ-S) and Five Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments (MAUIs)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 111-124, January.
    6. Catherine Milte & Ruth Walker & Mary Luszcz & Emily Lancsar & Billingsley Kaambwa & Julie Ratcliffe, 2014. "How Important Is Health Status in Defining Quality of Life for Older People? An Exploratory Study of the Views of Older South Australians," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 73-84, February.
    7. Nancy J. Devlin & Koonal K. Shah & Yan Feng & Brendan Mulhern & Ben van Hout, 2018. "Valuing health‐related quality of life: An EQ‐5D‐5L value set for England," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 7-22, January.
    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. Billingsley Kaambwa & Gang Chen & Julie Ratcliffe & Angelo Iezzi & Aimee Maxwell & Jeff Richardson, 2017. "Mapping Between the Sydney Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ-S) and Five Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments (MAUIs)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 111-124, January.
    2. 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.
    3. Theresa Tawiah & Kristian Schultz Hansen & Frank Baiden & Jane Bruce & Mathilda Tivura & Rupert Delimini & Seeba Amengo-Etego & Daniel Chandramohan & Seth Owusu-Agyei & Jayne Webster, 2016. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Test-Based versus Presumptive Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in Children under Five Years in an Area of High Transmission in Central Ghana," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, October.
    4. Neily Zakiyah & Antoinette D I van Asselt & Frank Roijmans & Maarten J Postma, 2016. "Economic Evaluation of Family Planning Interventions in Low and Middle Income Countries; A Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Paul Tappenden & James Chilcott, 2014. "Avoiding and Identifying Errors and Other Threats to the Credibility of Health Economic Models," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(10), pages 967-979, October.
    6. Rosarin Sruamsiri & Piyameth Dilokthornsakul & Chayanin Pratoomsoot & Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk, 2014. "A Cost-effectiveness Study of Intravenous Immunoglobulin in Childhood Idiopathic Thrombocytopenia Purpura Patients with Life-Threatening Bleeding," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(8), pages 801-813, August.
    7. Rowen, D & Brazier, J & Tsuchiya, A & Hernández, M & Ibbotson, R, 2009. "The simultaneous valuation of states from multiple instruments using ranking and VAS data: methods and preliminary results," MPRA Paper 29841, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Kittiphong Thiboonboon & Pattara Leelahavarong & Duangrurdee Wattanasirichaigoon & Nithiwat Vatanavicharn & Pornswan Wasant & Vorasuk Shotelersuk & Suthipong Pangkanon & Chulaluck Kuptanon & Sumonta C, 2015. "An Economic Evaluation of Neonatal Screening for Inborn Errors of Metabolism Using Tandem Mass Spectrometry in Thailand," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-25, August.
    9. Brown, Vicki & Diomedi, Belen Zapata & Moodie, Marj & Veerman, J. Lennert & Carter, Rob, 2016. "A systematic review of economic analyses of active transport interventions that include physical activity benefits," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 190-208.
    10. Astrid Ledgaard Holm & Lennert Veerman & Linda Cobiac & Ola Ekholm & Finn Diderichsen, 2014. "Cost-Effectiveness of Preventive Interventions to Reduce Alcohol Consumption in Denmark," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(2), pages 1-9, February.
    11. Kobelt, G., 2013. "Health Economics: An Introduction to Economic Evaluation," Monographs, Office of Health Economics, number 000004.
    12. Colin Green & David A Richards & Jacqueline J Hill & Linda Gask & Karina Lovell & Carolyn Chew-Graham & Peter Bower & John Cape & Stephen Pilling & Ricardo Araya & David Kessler & J Martin Bland & Sim, 2014. "Cost-Effectiveness of Collaborative Care for Depression in UK Primary Care: Economic Evaluation of a Randomised Controlled Trial (CADET)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-12, August.
    13. Tom L. Drake & Angela Devine & Shunmay Yeung & Nicholas P. J. Day & Lisa J. White & Yoel Lubell, 2016. "Dynamic Transmission Economic Evaluation of Infectious Disease Interventions in Low‐ and Middle‐Income Countries: A Systematic Literature Review," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(S1), pages 124-139, February.
    14. Ingrid Zechmeister-Koss & Petra Schnell-Inderst & Günther Zauner, 2014. "Appropriate Evidence Sources for Populating Decision Analytic Models within Health Technology Assessment (HTA)," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 34(3), pages 288-299, April.
    15. Edward Wilson, 2015. "A Practical Guide to Value of Information Analysis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 105-121, February.
    16. Saha, Sanjib & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Toresson, Håkan & Minthon, Lennart & Jarl, Johan, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Management of Dementia Patients - A Systematic Literature Review," Working Papers 2018:41, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    17. Yesim Tozan & Pitcha Ratanawong & Valérie R Louis & Pattamaporn Kittayapong & Annelies Wilder-Smith, 2014. "Use of Insecticide-Treated School Uniforms for Prevention of Dengue in Schoolchildren: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-9, September.
    18. Magnus Zingmark & Fredrik Norström & Lars Lindholm & Synneve Dahlin-Ivanoff & Susanne Gustafsson, 2019. "Modelling long-term cost-effectiveness of health promotion for community-dwelling older people," European Journal of Ageing, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 395-404, December.
    19. Brandon S Walker & Richard E Nelson & Brian R Jackson & David G Grenache & Edward R Ashwood & Robert L Schmidt, 2015. "A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of First Trimester Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening for Fetal Trisomies in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-20, July.
    20. Douwe Postmus & Tommi Tervonen & Gert Valkenhoef & Hans Hillege & Erik Buskens, 2014. "A multi-criteria decision analysis perspective on the health economic evaluation of medical interventions," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(7), pages 709-716, September.

    More about this item

    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:patien:v:11:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s40271-017-0259-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.