Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34089409›Full record

Trial reportThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2021

Modifying the quality-adjusted life year calculation to account for meaningful change in health-related quality of life: insights from a pragmatic clinical trial.

Nathan S McClure, Mike Paulden, Arto Ohinmaa, Jeffrey A Johnson

Abstract readPragmatic Clinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

4 authors.

Nathan S McClure2-040 Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Research Innovation, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E1, Canada.
Mike Paulden2-040 Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Research Innovation, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E1, Canada.
Arto Ohinmaa2-040 Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Research Innovation, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E1, Canada.
Jeffrey A Johnson2-040 Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Research Innovation, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E1, Canada. jeff.johnson@ualberta.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8290-2857

Funding

Alberta Innovates 201610640
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe propose a modified quality-adjusted life year (QALY) calculation that aims to be consistent with guidance for interpreting change in patient-reported outcomes. This calculation incorporates the minimally important difference (MID) in generic preference-based health-related quality of life (HRQL) change scores to reflect what might be considered meaningful HRQL improvement/deterioration. In doing so, we review common issues in QALY calculations such as adjustment for baseline scores and standardizing for between-group differences.

methodsUsing EQ-5D-5L outcome data from the Alberta TEAMCare-Primary Care Network trial in the management of depression for patients with type 2 diabetes (n = 98), this study compared results from different QALY calculation methods to investigate the impact of (i) adjusting for baseline HRQL score, (ii) standardizing between-group differences at baseline, and (iii) adjusting for 'meaningful' HRQL changes. The following QALY calculation methods are examined: area under curve (QALY-AUC), change from baseline (QALY-CFB), regression modelling (QALY-R), and incorporating an MID for HRQL changes from baseline (QALY-MID).

resultsThe incremental QALY-AUC estimate favoured the Collaborative Care group (0.031) while the incremental QALY-CFB (-0.028) estimate favoured Enhanced Care. Adjusting for meaningful HRQL changes resulted in a crude incremental QALY-MID of -0.023; however, after adjusting for between-group differences at baseline, QALY-R and adjusted incremental QALY-MID estimates were -0.007 and -0.001, respectively. In addition, recursive regression analyses showed that very low baseline HRQL scores impact incremental QALY estimates.

conclusionsUncertainty in incremental QALY estimates reflects uncertainty in the value of small within-individual change as well as the impact of small differences between groups at baseline. Applying a responder-definition approach yielded crude and adjusted QALY-MID estimates that were more in favour of Collaborative Care than QALY-CFB and QALY-R estimates, respectively, suggesting that ambiguous small changes in HRQL scores have the potential to influence QALY outcomes used in economic or non-economic applications.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Quality of LifeCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansQuality-Adjusted Life YearsDepressionHealth-related quality of lifeMinimally important differenceQuality-adjusted life yearType 2 diabetes

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.