Is EQ-5D-5L Better Than EQ-5D-3L? A Head-to-Head Comparison of Descriptive Systems and Value Sets from Seven Countries
Uložené v:
| Názov: | Is EQ-5D-5L Better Than EQ-5D-3L? A Head-to-Head Comparison of Descriptive Systems and Value Sets from Seven Countries |
|---|---|
| Autori: | Mathieu F. Janssen, Gouke J. Bonsel, Nan Luo |
| Prispievatelia: | Geboortecentrum voorzitterschap, Other research (not in main researchprogram) |
| Zdroj: | Pharmacoeconomics |
| Informácie o vydavateľovi: | Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2018. |
| Rok vydania: | 2018 |
| Predmety: | Adult, Male, Canada, China, Databases, Factual, Health Status, EMC NIHES-02-65-01, Sensitivity and Specificity, Young Adult, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Japan, Reference Values, Surveys and Questionnaires, Republic of Korea, Journal Article, Humans, Comparative Study, Original Research Article, Aged, Netherlands, Pharmacology, Models, Statistical, Health Policy, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Middle Aged, United Kingdom, Spain, Female, 0305 other medical science, Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data |
| Popis: | This study describes the first empirical head-to-head comparison of EQ-5D-3L (3L) and EQ-5D-5L (5L) value sets for multiple countries.A large multinational dataset, including 3L and 5L data for eight patient groups and a student cohort, was used to compare 3L versus 5L value sets for Canada, China, England/UK (5L/3L, respectively), Japan, The Netherlands, South Korea and Spain. We used distributional analyses and two methods exploring discriminatory power: relative efficiency as assessed by the F statistic, and an area under the curve for the receiver-operating characteristics approach. Differences in outcomes were explored by separating descriptive system effects from valuation effects, and by exploring distributional location effects.In terms of distributional evenness, efficiency of scale use and the face validity of the resulting distributions, 5L was superior, leading to an increase in sensitivity and precision in health status measurement. When compared with 5L, 3L systematically overestimated health problems and consequently underestimated utilities. This led to bias, i.e. over- or underestimations of discriminatory power.We conclude that 5L provides more precise measurement at individual and group levels, both in terms of descriptive system data and utilities. The increased sensitivity and precision of 5L is likely to be generalisable to longitudinal studies, such as in intervention designs. Hence, we recommend the use of the 5L across applications, including economic evaluation, clinical and public health studies. The evaluative framework proved to be useful in assessing preference-based instruments and might be useful for future work in the development of descriptive systems or health classifications. |
| Druh dokumentu: | Article Other literature type |
| Popis súboru: | image/pdf |
| Jazyk: | English |
| ISSN: | 1179-2027 1170-7690 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s40273-018-0623-8 |
| Prístupová URL adresa: | https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs40273-018-0623-8.pdf https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29470821 https://pure.eur.nl/en/publications/7d96b72f-95b5-4aca-a40a-8a1191a9e50d https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-018-0623-8 https://core.ac.uk/display/154416810 https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v36y2018i6d10.1007_s40273-018-0623-8.html https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29470821/ https://repub.eur.nl/pub/104893/REPUB_104893-OA.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5954015 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40273-018-0623-8 https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/364615 |
| Rights: | CC BY NC |
| Prístupové číslo: | edsair.doi.dedup.....289ad6d388d18f20d8da638d233d9fdb |
| Databáza: | OpenAIRE |
Full Text Finder 
Nájsť tento článok vo Web of Science | Abstrakt: | This study describes the first empirical head-to-head comparison of EQ-5D-3L (3L) and EQ-5D-5L (5L) value sets for multiple countries.A large multinational dataset, including 3L and 5L data for eight patient groups and a student cohort, was used to compare 3L versus 5L value sets for Canada, China, England/UK (5L/3L, respectively), Japan, The Netherlands, South Korea and Spain. We used distributional analyses and two methods exploring discriminatory power: relative efficiency as assessed by the F statistic, and an area under the curve for the receiver-operating characteristics approach. Differences in outcomes were explored by separating descriptive system effects from valuation effects, and by exploring distributional location effects.In terms of distributional evenness, efficiency of scale use and the face validity of the resulting distributions, 5L was superior, leading to an increase in sensitivity and precision in health status measurement. When compared with 5L, 3L systematically overestimated health problems and consequently underestimated utilities. This led to bias, i.e. over- or underestimations of discriminatory power.We conclude that 5L provides more precise measurement at individual and group levels, both in terms of descriptive system data and utilities. The increased sensitivity and precision of 5L is likely to be generalisable to longitudinal studies, such as in intervention designs. Hence, we recommend the use of the 5L across applications, including economic evaluation, clinical and public health studies. The evaluative framework proved to be useful in assessing preference-based instruments and might be useful for future work in the development of descriptive systems or health classifications. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 11792027 11707690 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s40273-018-0623-8 |