ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2016
Unchained melody: revisiting the estimation of SF-6D values.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors influencing medical expenditures in patients with unresolved facial palsy and pharmacoeconomic analysis of upper eyelid lid loading with gold and platinum weights compared to tarsorrhaphy.Health economics review · 2024Article
- US valuation of the SF-6D.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIn the original SF-6D valuation study, the analytical design inherited conventions that detrimentally affected its ability to predict values on a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) scale. Our objective is to estimate UK values for SF-6D states using the original data and multi-attribute utility (MAU) regression after addressing its limitations and to compare the revised SF-6D and EQ-5D value predictions.
methodsUsing the unaltered data (611 respondents, 3503 SG responses), the parameters of the original MAU model were re-estimated under three alternative error specifications, known as the instant, episodic, and angular random utility models. Value predictions on a QALY scale were compared to EQ-5D3L predictions using the 1996 Health Survey for England.
resultsContrary to the original results, the revised SF-6D value predictions range below 0 QALYs (i.e., worse than death) and agree largely with EQ-5D predictions after adjusting for scale. Although a QALY is defined as a year in optimal health, the SF-6D sets a higher standard for optimal health than the EQ-5D-3L; therefore, it has larger units on a QALY scale by construction (20.9 % more).
conclusionsMuch of the debate in health valuation has focused on differences between preference elicitation tasks, sampling, and instruments. After correcting errant econometric practices and adjusting for differences in QALY scale between the EQ-5D and SF-6D values, the revised predictions demonstrate convergent validity, making them more suitable for UK economic evaluations compared to original estimates.
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.