Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29524936›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health policy and management2018

Measuring the Benefits of Healthcare: DALYs and QALYs - Does the Choice of Measure Matter? A Case Study of Two Preventive Interventions.

Federico Augustovski, Lisandro D Colantonio, Julieta Galante, Ariel Bardach, Joaquín E Caporale, Víctor Zárate, Ling Hsiang Chuang, Andres Pichon-Riviere, Paul Kind

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health policy and management, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
22.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Health gap for multimorbidity: comparison of models combining uniconditional health gap.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Federico AugustovskiInstitute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS-CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Lisandro D ColantonioUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Julieta GalanteCardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Ariel BardachInstitute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS-CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Joaquín E CaporaleInstitute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS-CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Víctor ZárateFacultad de Medicina, Universidad San Sebastian, Santiago, Chile.
Ling Hsiang ChuangPharmerit, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Andres Pichon-Riviere *Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS-CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Paul KindUniversity of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria · ARCardiff University · GBConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas · ARPharmerit (Netherlands) · NLSan Sebastián University · CLUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe measurement of health benefits is a key issue in health economic evaluations. There is very scarce empirical literature exploring the differences of using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) or disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) as benefit metrics and their potential impact in decision-making.

methodsTwo previously published models delivering outputs in QALYs, were adapted to estimate DALYs: a Markov model for human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination, and a pneumococcal vaccination deterministic model (PNEUMO). Argentina, Chile, and the United Kingdom studies were used, where local EQ-5D social value weights were available to provide local QALY weights. A primary study with descriptive vignettes was done (n = 73) to obtain EQ-5D data for all health states included in both models. Several scenario analyses were carried-out to evaluate the relative importance of using different metrics (DALYS or QALYs) to estimate health benefits on these economic evaluations.

resultsQALY gains were larger than DALYs avoided in all countries for HPV, leading to more favorable decisions using the former. With discounting and age-weighting - scenario with greatest differences in all countries - incremental DALYs avoided represented the 75%, 68%, and 43% of the QALYs gained in Argentina, Chile, and United Kingdom respectively. Differences using QALYs or DALYs were less consistent and sometimes in the opposite direction for PNEUMO. These differences, similar to other widely used assumptions, could directly influence decision-making using usual gross domestic products (GDPs) per capita per DALY or QALY thresholds.

conclusionWe did not find evidence that contradicts current practice of many researchers and decision-makers of using QALYs or DALYs interchangeably. Differences attributed to the choice of metric could influence final decisions, but similarly to other frequently used assumptions.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationPreventive MedicineQuality-Adjusted Life YearsHumansModels, TheoreticalProgram EvaluationReproducibility of ResultsDisability-Adjusted Life Year (DALY)Economic EvaluationHealth Benefit MeasureQuality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY)

Identifiers

PMID29524936
PMCPMC5819372
OpenAlexW2614059409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.