ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2015
Preferred reporting items for studies mapping onto preference-based outcome measures: The MAPS statement.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Do country-specific preference weights matter in the choice of mapping algorithms? The case of mapping the Diabetes-39 onto eight country-specific EQ-5D-5L value sets.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Updated algorithms for direct and indirect mapping of WHOQOL-BREF to EQ-5D-5L utility scores using data from a multi-provincial Thai general population sample.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Article
- Article
- Quality of life post heart failure diagnosis: population-level trends in the U.S.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Article
- Mapping the ADDQoL to the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 among Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Article
- Considerations Around the Inclusion of Children and Young People's Time in Economic Evaluation: Findings from an International Delphi Study.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
- Mapping the EORTC QLQ-C30 onto the EQ-5D-5L index for patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria in France.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2023Article
- Obtaining EQ-5D-3L utility index from the health status scale of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM-HSS) based on a mapping study.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2022Article
- Estimating loss in quality of life associated with asthma-related crisis events (ESQUARE): a cohort, observational study.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2019Observational
- Predicting health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5 L) and capability wellbeing (ICECAP-A) in the context of opiate dependence using routine clinical outcome measures: CORE-OM, LDQ and TOP.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2018Article
- Generic and disease-specific estimates of quality of life in macular degeneration: mapping the MacDQoL onto the EQ-5D-3L.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2016Article
- 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 · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
'Mapping' onto generic preference-based outcome measures is increasingly being used as a means of generating health utilities for use within health economic evaluations. Despite publication of technical guides for the conduct of mapping research, guidance for the reporting of mapping studies is currently lacking. The MAPS (MApping onto Preference-based measures reporting Standards) statement is a new checklist, which aims to promote complete and transparent reporting of mapping studies. The primary audiences for the MAPS statement are researchers reporting mapping studies, the funders of the research, and peer reviewers and editors involved in assessing mapping studies for publication.A de novo list of 29 candidate reporting items and accompanying explanations was created by a working group comprised of six health economists and one Delphi methodologist. Following a two-round, modified Delphi survey with representatives from academia, consultancy, health technology assessment agencies and the biomedical journal editorial community, a final set of 23 items deemed essential for transparent reporting, and accompanying explanations, was developed. The items are contained in a user friendly 23 item checklist. They are presented numerically and categorised within six sections, namely: (i) title and abstract; (ii) introduction; (iii) methods; (iv) results; (v) discussion; and (vi) other. The MAPS statement is best applied in conjunction with the accompanying MAPS explanation and elaboration document.It is anticipated that the MAPS statement will improve the clarity, transparency and completeness of reporting of mapping studies. To facilitate dissemination and uptake, the MAPS statement is being co-published by eight health economics and quality of life journals, and broader endorsement is encouraged. The MAPS working group plans to assess the need for an update of the reporting checklist in five years' time.This statement was published jointly in Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Journal of Medical Economics, Medical Decision Making, PharmacoEconomics, and Quality of Life Research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.