IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v35y2017i7d10.1007_s40273-017-0491-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Investigation of the Overlap Between the ICECAP-A and Five Preference-Based Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments

Author

Listed:
  • Lidia Engel

    (Simon Fraser University
    Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute)

  • Duncan Mortimer

    (Monash University)

  • Stirling Bryan

    (Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute
    University of British Columbia)

  • Scott A. Lear

    (Simon Fraser University
    Providence Health Care)

  • David G. T. Whitehurst

    () (Simon Fraser University
    Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute
    International Collaboration on Repair Discoveries, University of British Columbia)

Abstract

Abstract Background The ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A) is a measure of capability wellbeing developed for use in economic evaluations. It was designed to overcome perceived limitations associated with existing preference-based instruments, where the explicit focus on health-related aspects of quality of life may result in the failure to capture fully the broader benefits of interventions and treatments that go beyond health. The aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which preference-based health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments are able to capture aspects of capability wellbeing, as measured by the ICECAP-A. Methods Using data from the Multi Instrument Comparison project, pairwise exploratory factor analyses were conducted to compare the ICECAP-A with five preference-based HRQoL instruments [15D, Assessment of Quality of Life 8-dimension (AQoL-8D), EQ-5D-5L, Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI-3), and SF-6D]. Results Data from 6756 individuals were used in the analyses. The ICECAP-A provides information above that garnered from most commonly used preference-based HRQoL instruments. The exception was the AQoL-8D; more common factors were identified between the ICECAP-A and AQoL-8D compared with the other pairwise analyses. Conclusion Further investigations are needed to explore the extent and potential implications of ‘double counting’ when applying the ICECAP-A alongside health-related preference-based instruments.

Suggested Citation

  • Lidia Engel & Duncan Mortimer & Stirling Bryan & Scott A. Lear & David G. T. Whitehurst, 2017. "An Investigation of the Overlap Between the ICECAP-A and Five Preference-Based Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(7), pages 741-753, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:35:y:2017:i:7:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0491-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-017-0491-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-017-0491-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    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. Richard Cookson, 2005. "QALYs and capabilities: a response to Anand," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(12), pages 1287-1289.
    2. Terry N. Flynn & Elisabeth Huynh & Tim J. Peters & Hareth Al‐Janabi & Sam Clemens & Alison Moody & Joanna Coast, 2015. "Scoring the Icecap‐a Capability Instrument. Estimation of a UK General Population Tariff," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 258-269, March.
    3. repec:spr:pharme:v:35:y:2017:i:6:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0495-3 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Drummond, Michael F. & Sculpher, Mark J. & Claxton, Karl & Stoddart, Greg L. & Torrance, George W., 2015. "Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 4, number 9780199665884.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Thesis Thursday: Lidia Engel
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2017-09-21 11:00:49

    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:pharme:v:35:y:2017:i:7:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0491-7. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). 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 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.

    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.