Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31104218›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2019

A comparison of European, Polish, Slovenian and British EQ-5D-3L value sets using a Hungarian sample of 18 chronic diseases.

Zsombor Zrubka, Zsuzsanna Beretzky, Zoltán Hermann, Valentin Brodszky, László Gulácsi, Fanni Rencz, Petra Baji, Dominik Golicki, Valentina Prevolnik-Rupel, Márta Péntek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. EQ-5D-5L Slovenian population norms.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

10 authors.

Zsombor ZrubkaDepartment of Health Economics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8., Budapest, 1093, Hungary. zsombor.zrubka@uni-corvinus.hu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1992-6087
Zsuzsanna BeretzkyDepartment of Health Economics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8., Budapest, 1093, Hungary.
Zoltán HermannCentre for Economic and Regional Studies, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Tóth Kálmán u. 4, Budapest, 1097, Hungary.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9805-9905
Valentin BrodszkyDepartment of Health Economics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8., Budapest, 1093, Hungary.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6095-2295
László GulácsiDepartment of Health Economics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8., Budapest, 1093, Hungary.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9285-8746
Fanni RenczDepartment of Health Economics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8., Budapest, 1093, Hungary.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9674-620X
Petra BajiDepartment of Health Economics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8., Budapest, 1093, Hungary.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2899-8557
Dominik GolickiDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology, Medical University of Warsaw, Banacha 1B, Warsaw, 02-097, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7741-4760
Valentina Prevolnik-RupelInstitute for Economic Research, Kardeljeva ploščad 17, 1109, Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1238-7156
Márta PéntekDepartment of Health Economics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8., Budapest, 1093, Hungary.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9636-6012

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the Central and Eastern European region, the British EQ-5D-3L value set is used commonly in quality of life (QoL) studies. Only Poland and Slovenia have country-specific weights. Our study aimed to investigate the impact of value set choice on the evaluation of 18 chronic conditions in Hungary.

methodsPatients' EQ-5D-3L index scores were calculated using the VAS-based Slovenian and European and the time-trade-off-based Polish and British value sets. We performed pairwise comparisons of mean index values by dimensions, diagnoses and age groups. We evaluated disease burden by comparing index values matched by age and gender in each condition with those of the general population of the CEE region in all four value sets.

resultsAltogether, 2421 patients (55% female) were included in our sample with the average age of 55.87 years (SD = 17.75). The average Slovenian, European, Polish and British EQ-5D-3L scores were 0.598 (SD = 0.279), 0.661 (SD = 0.257), 0.770 (SD = 0.261) and 0.644 (SD = 0.279), respectively. We found highly significant differences in most diagnoses, with the greatest difference between the Polish and Slovenian index values in Parkinson's disease (0.265). Systematic pairwise comparison across all conditions and value sets revealed greatest differences between the time-trade-off (TTO) and VAS-based value sets as well as varying sensitivity of the disease burden evaluations of chronic disease conditions to the choice of value sets.

conclusionsOur results suggest that the choice of value set largely influences the health state utility results in chronic diseases, and might have a significant impact on health policy decisions.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overChronic DiseaseEuropeEurope, EasternFemaleHumansHungaryMaleMiddle AgedQuality of LifeSeverity of Illness IndexSurveys and QuestionnairesChronic diseaseDisease burdenEQ-5D-3LHungaryPolandQuality of lifeSloveniaValue set

Identifiers

PMID31104218
PMCPMC6544595

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.