Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23832811›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2013

Constructing indirect utility models: some observations on the principles and practice of mapping to obtain health state utilities.

Christopher McCabe, Richard Edlin, David Meads, Chantelle Brown, Samer Kharroubi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Mapping the EORTC QLQ-C30 onto the EQ-5D-3L: assessing the external validity of existing mapping algorithms.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2016
    Article
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

5 authors.

Christopher McCabeCapital Health Endowed Research Chair, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Suite 736 University Terrace, 8303 112 Street, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2T4, Canada. mccabe1@ualberta.ca
Richard Edlin
David Meads
Chantelle Brown
Samer Kharroubi

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0707-10101Medical Research Council G0901490
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The construction of mapping models is an increasingly popular mechanism for obtaining health state utility data to inform economic evaluations in health care. There is great variation in the sophistication of the methods utilized but to date very little discussion of the appropriate theoretical framework to guide the design and evaluation of these models. In this paper, we argue that recognizing mapping models as a form of indirect health state valuation allows the use of the framework described by Dolan for the measurement of social preferences over health. Using this framework, we identify substantial concerns with the method for valuing health states that is implicit in indirect utility models (IUMs), the conflation of two sets of respondents' values in such models, and the lack of a structured and statistically reasonable approach to choosing which states to value and how many observations per state to require in the estimation dataset. We also identify additional statistical challenges associated with clustering and censoring in the datasets for IUMs, additional to those attributable to the descriptive systems, and a potentially significant problem with the systematic understatement of uncertainty in predictions from IUMs. Whilst recognizing that IUMs appear to meet the needs of reimbursement organizations that use quality-adjusted life years in their appraisal processes, we argue that current proposed quality standards are inadequate and that IUMs are neither robust nor appropriate mechanisms for estimating utilities for use in cost-effectiveness analyses.

Indexed as

Health StatusModels, EconomicCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansQuality-Adjusted Life YearsQuality of Life

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.