ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2020
3125 steps to perfect health: a nonparametric approach to developing the EQ-5D-5L value set.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe EQ-5D-5L is a commonly used instrument for assessing the utility of different health states. Health state utility values are a key component of health technology evaluations. Such evaluations are used to support evidence-based decisions surrounding health resource allocations and therefore rely on the accuracy of the valuation set used. This paper takes an alternative approach to developing an EQ-5D-5L value set for Canada. The aim is to introduce a robust method that is likely to generate a value set with improved accuracy and that can be used to generate value sets for other populations without the need for modification.
methodsThe common approach to developing a valuation set for preference-based instruments is to ask a population sample to value a subset of the health states using an established preference elicitation technique. The relationship between the elicited health states and the preferences is used to inform a model to predict the utility values for the unsampled health states described by the instrument. The true relationship is unknown and the functional forms chosen in the modelling process vary across valuation studies. We use nonparametric local constant regression to estimate an EQ-5D-5L value set for Canada and propose this method as an alternative for value set development because it does not require the specification of a functional form at the outset.
resultsCompared to the existing valuation model for Canada, the nonparametric method improves in-sample fit, reducing the average squared prediction error by 94.46% and the mean absolute error by 79.37%. In four of five sets of out-of-sample studies, this new approach performs significantly better than 9 comparison models. Despite lacking any restriction on the functional form of the resulting valuations, the valuation set generated by this new approach is logically consistent. 100% of the pairs of health states in which one state is dominant have health state values which respect this ordering. The value set also appears to differ substantially from the comparators.
conclusionsOverall, the results suggest that nonparametric regression is a promising tool for the estimation of EQ-5D-5L valuation sets and may be a good option in a standardised methodology for value set development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32705459What 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.