IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/her/chewps/2007-9.html

Valuing EQ-5D health states: A review and analysis, CHERE Working Paper 2007/9

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Norman

    (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)

  • Paula Cronin

    (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)

  • Rosalie Viney

    (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)

  • Madeleine King

    (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)

  • Deborah Street

    (University of Technology, Sydney)

  • John Brazier
  • Julie Ratcliffe

Abstract

Objective: To identify the key methodological issues in the construction of population-level EQ-5D / Time Trade-Off (TTO) preference elicitation studies. Study Design: This study involves three components. The first was to identify existing population-level EQ-5D TTO studies. The second was to illustrate and discuss the key areas of divergence between studies, including the international comparison of tariffs. The third was to portray the relative merits of each of the approaches, and to compare the results of studies across countries. Results: While most papers report use of the protocol developed in the original UK study, we identified three key areas of divergence in the construction and analysis of surveys. These are the number of health states valued in order to determine the algorithm for estimating all health states, the approach to valuing states worse than immediate death, and the choice of algorithm. Finally, the evidence on international comparisons suggests differences between countries, although it is difficult to disentangle differences in cultural attitudes with random error and differences due to methodological divergence. Conclusion: Differences in methods are likely to obscure true differences in values between countries. However, population-specific valuation sets for countries engaging in economic evaluation would better represent societal attitudes.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Norman & Paula Cronin & Rosalie Viney & Madeleine King & Deborah Street & John Brazier & Julie Ratcliffe, 2007. "Valuing EQ-5D health states: A review and analysis, CHERE Working Paper 2007/9," Working Papers 2007/9, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
    • Handle: RePEc:her:chewps:2007/9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.chere.uts.edu.au/pdf/wp2007_9.pdf
    File Function: First version, October 2007
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nancy J. Devlin & Paul Hansen & Paul Kind & Alan Williams, 2003. "Logical inconsistencies in survey respondents' health state valuations ‐ a methodological challenge for estimating social tariffs," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(7), pages 529-544, July.
    2. Paul Dolan & Claire Gudex & Paul Kind & Alan Williams, 1995. "A social tariff for EuroQol: results from a UK general population survey," Working Papers 138chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    3. L. M. Lamers & J. McDonnell & P. F. M. Stalmeier & P. F. M. Krabbe & J. J. V. Busschbach, 2006. "The Dutch tariff: results and arguments for an effective design for national EQ‐5D valuation studies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(10), pages 1121-1132, October.
    4. Xavier Badia & Montserrat Roset & Michael Herdman & Paul Kind, 2001. "A Comparison of United Kingdom and Spanish General Population Time Trade-off Values for EQ-5D Health States," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(1), pages 7-16, February.
    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. Richard Norman & Rosalie Viney, 2008. "The effect of discounting on quality of life valuation using the Time Trade-Off, CHERE Working Paper 2008/3," Working Papers 2008/3, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
    2. SeungJin Bae & SooOk Lee & Eun Bae & Sunmee Jang, 2013. "Korean Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation (Second and Updated Version)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 257-267, April.
    3. Nan Luo & Pei Wang & Julian Thumboo & Yee-Wei Lim & Hubertus Vrijhoef, 2014. "Valuation of EQ-5D-3L Health States in Singapore: Modeling of Time Trade-Off Values for 80 Empirically Observed Health States," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 495-507, May.
    4. Richard Norman & Paula Cronin & Rosalie Viney, 2013. "A Pilot Discrete Choice Experiment to Explore Preferences for EQ-5D-5L Health States," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 287-298, June.
    5. Marion Haas & Richard Norman & Jeff Walkley & Leah Brennan, 2009. "Issues in evaluating the costs and cost-effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for overweight/obese adolescents, CHERE Working Paper 2009/1," Working Papers 2009/1, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
    6. Anne B Wichmann & Eddy M M Adang & Kris C P Vissers & Katarzyna Szczerbińska & Marika Kylänen & Sheila Payne & Giovanni Gambassi & Bregje D Onwuteaka-Philipsen & Tinne Smets & Lieve Van den Block & Lu, 2018. "Technical-efficiency analysis of end-of-life care in long-term care facilities within Europe: A cross-sectional study of deceased residents in 6 EU countries (PACE)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-12, September.
    7. Liv Augestad & Kim Rand-Hendriksen & Ivar Kristiansen & Knut Stavem, 2012. "Impact of Transformation of Negative Values and Regression Models on Differences Between the UK and US EQ-5D Time Trade-Off Value Sets," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(12), pages 1203-1214, December.
    8. Richard Norman & Paula Cronin & Rosalie Viney, 2012. "Deriving utility weights for the EQ-5D-5L using a discrete choice experiment. CHERE Working Paper 2012/01," Working Papers 2012/01, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
    9. Klazien Matter-Walstra & Dirk Klingbiel & Thomas Szucs & Bernhard Pestalozzi & Matthias Schwenkglenks, 2014. "Using the EuroQol EQ-5D in Swiss Cancer Patients, Which Value Set Should be Applied?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 591-599, June.
    10. SeungJin Bae & Eun Bae & Sang Lim, 2014. "Sourcing Quality-of-Life Weights Obtained from Previous Studies: Theory and Reality in Korea," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 7(2), pages 141-150, June.
    11. Joel Thompson & Amir Abdolahi & Katia Noyes, 2013. "Modelling the Cost Effectiveness of Disease-Modifying Treatments for Multiple Sclerosis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(6), pages 455-469, June.

    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. Irina Cleemput, 2010. "A social preference valuations set for EQ-5D health states in Flanders, Belgium," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 11(2), pages 205-213, April.
    2. Marian Sorin Paveliu & Elena Olariu & Raluca Caplescu & Yemi Oluboyede & Ileana-Gabriela Niculescu-Aron & Simona Ernu & Luke Vale, 2021. "Estimating an EQ-5D-3L Value Set for Romania Using Time Trade-Off," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-16, July.
    3. Juan Ramos-Goñi & Oliver Rivero-Arias & María Errea & Elly Stolk & Michael Herdman & Juan Cabasés, 2013. "Dealing with the health state ‘dead’ when using discrete choice experiments to obtain values for EQ-5D-5L heath states," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(1), pages 33-42, July.
    4. Mathieu F. Janssen & Ines Buchholz & Dominik Golicki & Gouke J. Bonsel, 2022. "Is EQ-5D-5L Better Than EQ-5D-3L Over Time? A Head-to-Head Comparison of Responsiveness of Descriptive Systems and Value Sets from Nine Countries," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(11), pages 1081-1093, November.
    5. Munir A. Khan & Jeff Richardson, 2019. "Is the Validity of Cost Utility Analysis Improved When Utility is Measured by an Instrument with ‘Home-Country’ Weights? Evidence from Six Western Countries," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 1-15, August.
    6. Adrian Bagust & Sophie Beale, 2005. "Modelling EuroQol health‐related utility values for diabetic complications from CODE‐2 data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 217-230, March.
    7. Julie Chevalier & Gérard Pouvourville, 2013. "Valuing EQ-5D using Time Trade-Off in France," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(1), pages 57-66, February.
    8. Eleanor Pullenayegum & Kuhan Perampaladas & Kathryn Gaebel & Brett Doble & Feng Xie, 2015. "Between-country heterogeneity in EQ-5D-3L scoring algorithms: how much is due to differences in health state selection?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(8), pages 847-855, November.
    9. Rodríguez-Míguez, E. & Abellán-Perpiñán, J.M. & Alvarez, X.C. & González, X.M. & Sampayo, A.R., 2016. "The DEP-6D, a new preference-based measure to assess health states of dependency," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 210-219.
    10. Bansback, Nick & Brazier, John & Tsuchiya, Aki & Anis, Aslam, 2012. "Using a discrete choice experiment to estimate health state utility values," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 306-318.
    11. Abeer Rabayah & Bram Roudijk & Fredrick Dermawan Purba & Fanni Rencz & Saad Jaddoua & Uwe Siebert, 2025. "Valuation of the EQ-5D-3L in Jordan," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 26(3), pages 487-501, April.
    12. Garry R. Barton & Tracey H. Sach & Anthony J. Avery & Claire Jenkinson & Michael Doherty & David K. Whynes & Kenneth R. Muir, 2008. "A comparison of the performance of the EQ‐5D and SF‐6D for individuals aged ≥ 45 years," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(7), pages 815-832, July.
    13. Raymond Oppong & Billingsley Kaambwa & Jacqueline Nuttall & Kerenza Hood & Richard Smith & Joanna Coast, 2013. "The impact of using different tariffs to value EQ-5D health state descriptions: an example from a study of acute cough/lower respiratory tract infections in seven countries," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(2), pages 197-209, April.
    14. Versteegh, MM & Attema, AE & Oppe, M & Devlin, NJ & Stolk, EA, 2012. "Time to tweak the TTO. But how?," MPRA Paper 37989, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. David Parkin & Nigel Rice & Nancy Devlin, 2010. "Statistical Analysis of EQ-5D Profiles: Does the Use of Value Sets Bias Inference?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(5), pages 556-565, September.
    16. Feng Xie & Kathryn Gaebel & Kuhan Perampaladas & Brett Doble & Eleanor Pullenayegum, 2014. "Comparing EQ-5D Valuation Studies," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 34(1), pages 8-20, January.
    17. Bansback, Nick & Brazier, John & Tsuchiya, Aki & Anis, Aslam, 2010. "Using a discrete choice experiment to estimate societal health state utility values," MPRA Paper 29933, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Bram Roudijk & A. Rogier T. Donders & Peep F. M. Stalmeier, 2019. "Cultural Values: Can They Explain Differences in Health Utilities between Countries?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 39(5), pages 605-616, July.
    19. Méndez, Ildefonso & Abellán Perpiñán, Jose M. & Sánchez Martínez, Fernando I. & Martínez Pérez, Jorge E., 2011. "Inverse probability weighted estimation of social tariffs: An illustration using the SF-6D value sets," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 1280-1292.
    20. Samer A. Kharroubi & Yara Beyh & Marwa Diab El Harake & Dalia Dawoud & Donna Rowen & John Brazier, 2020. "Examining the Feasibility and Acceptability of Valuing the Arabic Version of SF-6D in a Lebanese Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-15, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General

    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:her:chewps:2007/9. 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: Liz Chinchen The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Liz Chinchen to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/chusyau.html .

    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.