Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22328929›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Canadian valuation of EQ-5D health states: preliminary value set and considerations for future valuation studies.

Nick Bansback, Aki Tsuchiya, John Brazier, Aslam Anis

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05990166 (Randomised Controlled Trial to Assess the Effect of a Mineral-enriched Powder on Iron Deficiency in Women of Reproductive Age), which is not on this map. Cited by 125 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
125citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05990166 phase2completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Randomised Controlled Trial to Assess the Effect of a Mineral-enriched Powder on Iron Deficiency in Women of Reproductive Age

TypeinterventionalSponsorCarleton UniversityRan2023 to 2026Enrolled150ConditionsIron Deficiency, Iron Deficiency AnaemiaArmsMineral-enriched powder, Placebo powder
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

125 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Health state utility values measured using the EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire in adults with chronic hepatitis C: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019
    Pooled it
  3. Cancer-specific utility: clinical validation of the EORTC QLU-C10D in patients with glioblastoma.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Sensitivity to change of generic preference-based instruments (EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and HUI3) in the context of treatment for people with prescription-type opioid use disorder in Canada.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Trial
  8. Establishing the minimal clinically important difference of the EQ-5D-3L in older adults with a history of falls.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022
    Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. The added effect of comorbidity on health-related quality of life in patients with asthma.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2015
    Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

65 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Nick BansbackSchool of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. nick.bansback@ubc.ca
Aki Tsuchiya
John Brazier
Aslam Anis

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe EQ-5D is a preference based instrument which provides a description of a respondent's health status, and an empirically derived value for that health state often from a representative sample of the general population. It is commonly used to derive Quality Adjusted Life Year calculations (QALY) in economic evaluations. However, values for health states have been found to differ between countries. The objective of this study was to develop a set of values for the EQ-5D health states for use in Canada.

methodsValues for 48 different EQ-5D health states were elicited using the Time Trade Off (TTO) via a web survey in English. A random effect model was fitted to the data to estimate values for all 243 health states of the EQ-5D. Various model specifications were explored. Comparisons with EQ-5D values from the UK and US were made. Sensitivity analysis explored different transformations of values worse than dead, and exclusion criteria of subjects.

resultsThe final model was estimated from the values of 1145 subjects with socio-demographics broadly representative of Canadian general population with the exception of Quebec. This yielded a good fit with observed TTO values, with an overall R2 of 0.403 and a mean absolute error of 0.044.

conclusionA preference-weight algorithm for Canadian studies that include the EQ-5D is developed. The primary limitations regarded the representativeness of the final sample, given the language used (English only), the method of recruitment, and the difficulty in the task. Insights into potential issues for conducting valuation studies in countries as large and diverse as Canada are gained.

Indexed as

Health StatusQuality-Adjusted Life YearsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCanadaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuebecYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID22328929
PMCPMC3273479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.