Common scale valuations across different preference-based measures: estimation using rank data

Background: Different preference-based measures (PBMs) used to estimate Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) provide di¤erent utility values for the same patient. Differences are expected since values have been obtained using different samples, valuation techniques and descriptive systems. Previous studies have estimated the relationship between pairs of PBMs using patient self-reported data. However, there is a need for an approach capable of generating values directly on a common scale for a range of PBMs using the same sample of general population respondents and valuation technique but keeping the advantages of the different descriptive systems. Methods: General public survey data (n=501) where respondents ranked health states described using subsets of six PBMs were analysed. We develop a new model based on the mixed logit to overcome two key limitations of the standard rank ordered logit model, namely, the unrealistic choice pattern (Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives) and the independence of repeated observations. Results: There are substantial differences in the estimated parameters between the two models (mean di¤erence 0.07) leading to di¤erent orderings across the measures. Estimated values for the best states described by di¤erent PBMs are substantially and significantly di¤erent using the standard model, unlike our approach which yields more consistent results. Limitations: Data come from a exploratory study that is relatively small both in sample size and coverage of health states. Conclusions: This study develops a new, �exible econometric model specifically designed to reflect appropriately the features of rank data. Results support the view that the standard model is not appropriate in this setting and will yield very different and apparently inconsistent results. PBMs can be compared using a common scale by implementation of this new approach

Using Rasch analysis to form plausible health states amenable to valuation: the development of CORE-6D from CORE-OM in order to elicit preferences for common mental health problems

Purpose: To describe a new approach for deriving a preference-based index from a condition specific measure that uses Rasch analysis to develop health states. Methods: CORE-OM is a 34-item instrument monitoring clinical outcomes of people with common mental health problems. CORE-OM is characterised by high correlation across its domains. Rasch analysis was used to reduce the number of items and response levels in order to produce a set of unidimensionally-behaving items, and to generate a credible set of health states corresponding to different levels of symptom severity using the Rasch item threshold map. Results: The proposed methodology resulted in the development of CORE-6D, a 2-dimensional health state description system consisting of a unidimensionally-behaving 5-item emotional component and a physical symptom item. Inspection of the Rasch item threshold map of the emotional component helped identify a set of 11 plausible health states, which, combined with the physical symptom item levels, will be used for the valuation of the instrument, resulting in the development of a preference-based index. Conclusions: This is a useful new approach to develop preference-based measures where the domains of a measure are characterised by high correlation. The CORE-6D preference-based index will enable calculation of Quality Adjusted Life Years in people with common mental health problems

Estimating a preference-based index from the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure (CORE-OM): valuation of CORE-6D

Background: The Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) is used to evaluate the effectiveness of psychological therapies in people with common mental disorders. The objective of this study was to estimate a preference-based index for this population using CORE-6D, a health state classification system derived from CORE-OM consisting of a 5-item emotional component and a physical item, and to demonstrate a novel method for generating states that are not orthogonal. Methods: Rasch analysis was used to identify 11 plausible ‘emotional’ health states from CORE-6D (rather than conventional statistical design that would generate implausible states). By combining these with the 3 response levels of the physical item of CORE-6D, 33 plausible health states can be described, of which 18 were selected for valuation. An interview valuation survey of 220 members of public in South Yorkshire, UK, was undertaken using the time-trade-off method to value the 18 health states; regression analysis was subsequently used to predict values for all possible states described by CORE-6D. Results: A number of multivariate regression models were built to predict values for the 33 plausible health states of CORE-6D, using the Rasch logit value of the emotional health state and the response level of the physical item as independent variables. A cubic model with high predictive value (adjusted R squared 0.990) was finally selected, which can be used to predict utility values for all 927 states described by CORE-6D. Conclusion: The CORE-6D preference-based index will enable the assessment of cost-effectiveness of interventions for people with common mental disorders using existing and prospective CORE-OM datasets. The new method for generating states may be useful for other instruments with highly correlated dimensions

The simultaneous valuation of states from multiple instruments using ranking and VAS data: methods and preliminary results

Background: Previous methods of empirical mapping involve using regressions on patient or general population self-report data from datasets involving 2 or more instruments. This approach relies on overlap in the descriptive systems of the measures, but key dimensions may not be present in both measures. Furthermore, this assumes it is appropriate to use different instruments on the same population, which may not be the case for all patient groups. The aim of the study described here is to develop a new method of mapping using general population preferences for hypothetical health states defined by the descriptive systems of different measures. This paper presents a description of the methods used in the study and reports on the results of the valuation study including details about the respondents, feasibility and quality (e.g. response rate, completion and consistency) and descriptive results on VAS and ranking data. The use of these results to estimate mapping functions between instruments will be presented in a companion paper. Methods: The study used interviewer administered versions of ranking and VAS techniques to value 13 health states defined by each of 6 instruments: EQ-5D (generic), SF-6D (generic), HUI2 (generic for children), AQL-5D (asthma specific), OPUS (social care specific), ICECAP (capabilities). Each interview involved 3 ranking and visual analogue scale (VAS) tasks with states from 3 different instruments where each task involves the simultaneous valuation of multiple instruments. The study includes 13 health and well-being states for each instrument (16 for EQ-5D) that reflect a range of health state values according to the published health state values for each instrument and each health state is valued approximately 75-100 times. Results: The sample consists of 499 members of the UK general population with a reasonable spread of background characteristics (response rate=55%). The study achieved a completion rate of 99% for all states included in the rank and rating tasks and 94.8% of respondents have complete VAS responses and 97.2% have complete rank responses. Interviewers reported that it is doubtful for 4.1% of respondents that they understood the tasks, and 29.3% of respondents stated that they found the tasks difficult. The results suggest important differences in the range of mean VAS and mean rank values per state across instruments; for example, mean VAS values for the worst state vary across instruments from 0.075 to 0.324. Respondents are able to change the ordering of states between the rank and VAS tasks and 12.0% of respondents have one or more differences in their rank and VAS orderings for every task. Conclusions: This study has demonstrated the feasibility of simultaneously valuing health states from different preference-based instruments. The preliminary analysis of the results presented here provides the basis for a new method of mapping between measures based on general population preferences

The simultaneous valuation of states from multiple instruments using ranking and VAS data: methods and preliminary results

Background: Previous methods of empirical mapping involve using regressions on patient or general population self-report data from datasets involving two or more instruments. This approach relies on overlap in the descriptive systems of the measures, but key dimensions may not be present in both measures. Furthermore this assumes it is appropriate to use different instruments on the same population, which may not be the case for all patient groups. The aim of the study described here is to develop a new method of mapping using general population preferences for hypothetical health states defined by the descriptive systems of different measures. This paper presents a description of the methods used in the study and reports on the results of the valuation study including details about the respondents, feasibility and quality (e.g. response rate, completion and consistency) and descriptive results on VAS and ranking data. The use of these results to estimate mapping functions between instruments will be presented in a companion paper. Methods: The study used interviewer administered versions of ranking and VAS techniques to value 13 health states defined by each of 6 instruments: EQ-5D (generic), SF-6D (generic), HUI2 (generic for children), AQL-5D (asthma specific), OPUS (social care specific), ICECAP (capabilities). Each interview involved 3 ranking and visual analogue scale (VAS) tasks with states from 3 different instruments where each task involves the simultaneous valuation of multiple instruments. The study includes 13 health and well-being states for each instrument (16 for EQ-5D) that reflect a range of health state values according to the published health state values for each instrument and each health state is valued approximately 75-100 times. Results: The sample consists of 499 members of the UK general population with a reasonable spread of background characteristics (response rate=55%). The study achieved a completion rate of 99% for all states included in the rank and rating tasks and 94.8% of respondents have complete VAS responses and 97.2% have complete rank responses. Interviewers reported that it is doubtful for 4.1% of respondents that they understood the tasks, and 29.3% of respondents stated that they found the tasks difficult. The results suggest important differences in the range of mean VAS and mean rank values per state across instruments, for example mean VAS values for the worst state vary across instruments from 0.075 to 0.324. Respondents are able to change the ordering of states between the rank and VAS tasks and 12.0% of respondents have one or more differences in their rank and VAS orderings for every task. Conclusions: This study has demonstrated the feasibility of simultaneously valuing health states from different preference-based instruments. The preliminary analysis of the results presented here provides the basis for a new method of mapping between measures based on general population preferences.preference-based measures of health; quality of life; mapping; visual analogue scale; ranking

Estimating a preference-based index from the clinical outcomes in routine evaluation-outcome measure (CORE-OM): Valuation of CORE-6D

Background. The Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation–Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) is used to evaluate the effectiveness of psychological therapies in people with common mental disorders. The objective of this study was to estimate a preference-based index for this population using CORE-6D, a health state classification system derived from the CORE-OM consisting of a 5-item emotional component and a physical item, and to demonstrate a novel method for generating states that are not orthogonal. Methods. Rasch analysis was used to identify 11 emotional health states from CORE-6D that were frequently observed in the study population and are, thus, plausible (in contrast, conventional statistical design might generate implausible states). Combined with the 3 response levels of the physical item of CORE-6D, they generate 33 plausible health states, 18 of which were selected for valuation. A valuation survey of 220 members of the public in South Yorkshire, United Kingdom, was undertaken using the time tradeoff (TTO) method. Regression analysis was subsequently used to predict values for all possible states described by CORE-6D. Results. A number of multivariate regression models were built to predict values for the 33 health states of CORE-6D, using the Rasch logit value of the emotional state and the response level of the physical item as independent variables. A cubic model with high predictive value (adjusted R2 = 0.990) was selected to predict TTO values for all 729 CORE-6D health states. Conclusion. The CORE-6D preference-based index will enable the assessment of cost-effectiveness of interventions for people with common mental disorders using existing and prospective CORE-OM data sets. The new method for generating states may be useful for other instruments with highly correlated dimensions

An assessment of validity and responsiveness of generic measures of health-related quality of life in hearing impairment

This article is made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.Purpose: This review examines psychometric performance of three widely used generic preference-based measures, that is, EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D), Health Utility Index 3 (HUI3) and Short-form 6 dimensions (SF-6D) in patients with hearing impairments. Methods: A systematic search was undertaken to identify studies of patients with hearing impairments where health state utility values were measured and reported. Data were extracted and analysed to assess the reliability, validity (known group differences and convergent validity) and responsiveness of the measures across hearing impairments. Results: Fourteen studies (18 papers) were included in the review. HUI3 was the most commonly used utility measures in hearing impairment. In all six studies, the HUI3 detected difference between groups defined by the severity of impairment, and four out of five studies detected statistically significant changes as a result of intervention. The only study available suggested that EQ-5D only had weak ability to discriminate difference between severity groups, and in four out of five studies, EQ-5D failed to detected changes. Only one study involved the SF-6D; thus, the information is too limited to conclude on its performance. Also evidence for the reliability of these measures was not found. Conclusion: Overall, the validity and responsiveness of the HUI3 in hearing impairment was good. The responsiveness of EQ-5D was relatively poor and weak validity was suggested by limited evidence. The evidence on SF-6D was too limited to make any judgment. More head-to-head comparisons of these and other preference measures of health are required.Medical Research Counci

EQ-5D in skin conditions: an assessment of validity and responsiveness

Aims and objectives This systematic literature review aims to assess the reliability, validity and responsiveness of three widely used generic preference-based measures of health-related quality of life (HRQL), i.e., EQ-5D, Health Utility Index 3 (HUI3) and SF-6D in patients with skin conditions. Methods A systematic search was conducted to identify studies reporting health state utility values obtained using EQ-5D, SF-6D, or HUI3 alongside other HRQL measures or clinical indices for patients with skin conditions. Data on test-retest analysis for reliability, known group differences or correlation and regression analyses for validity, and change over time or responsiveness indices analysis were extracted and reviewed. Results A total of 16 papers reporting EQ-5D utilities in people with skin conditions were included in the final review. No papers for SF-6D and HUI3 were found. Evidence of reliability was not found for any of these measures. The majority of studies included in the review (12 out of 16) examined patients with plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis and the remaining four studies examined patients with either acne, hidradenitis suppurativa, hand eczema, or venous leg ulcers. The findings were generally positive in terms of performance of EQ-5D. Six studies showed that EQ-5D was able to reflect differences between severity groups and only one reported differences that were not statistically significant. Four studies found that EQ-5D detected differences between patients and the general population, and differences were statistically different for three of them. Further, moderate-to-strong correlation coefficients were found between EQ-5D and other skin-specific HRQL measures in four studies. Eight studies showed that EQ-5D was able to detect change in HRQL appropriately over time and the changes were statistically significant in seven studies. Conclusions Overall, the validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D was found to be good in people with skin diseases, especially plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis. No evidence on SF-6D and HUI3 was available to enable any judgments to be made on their performance