Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34260017›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics - open2021

Estimation of Health-Related Utilities for

Ioana-Alexandra Soare, Oscar Leeuwenkamp, Louise Longworth

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics - open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Comparing EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 utilities with QLU-C10D utilities in hematologic cancer patients.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. The EORTC QLU-C10D is a valid cancer-specific preference-based measure for cost-utility and health technology assessment in the Netherlands.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024
    Article
  4. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ioana-Alexandra SoarePHMR Limited, Berkeley Works, Berkley Grove, London, NW1 8XY, UK. alexandrasoare@phmr.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3391-1551
Oscar LeeuwenkampAdvanced Accelerator Applications, a Novartis company, Geneva, Switzerland.
Louise LongworthPHMR Limited, Berkeley Works, Berkley Grove, London, NW1 8XY, UK.
Bury College · GBCJR Propulsion (United Kingdom) · GBNovartis (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP-NET) are a rare, life-threatening type of cancer. The survival benefit of

objectiveThe main aim of this study was to compare EQ-5D-3L and QLU-C10D utilities obtained from EORTC QLQ-C30 using two different approaches. A secondary aim was to analyse the EQ-5D-3L and QLU-C10D utilities of patients treated with

methodsThree datasets were used for the analysis. NETTER-1 is a clinical trial, whilst ERASMUS and Guy's and St. Thomas (GStT) are real-world datasets. Two mapping algorithms (response mapping and ordinary least square regression) were applied to generate EQ-5D-3L utilities from EORTC QLQ-C30. An algorithm was used to obtain QLU-C10D utilities from EORTC QLQ-C30.

resultsIn all studies, EQ-5D-3L utilities were higher than QLU-C10D utilities at most time points measured, although the magnitude of the differences was small. In NETTER-1, EQ-5D-3L and QLU-C10D utilities were higher in the

conclusionThere were small differences between EQ-5D-3L and QLU-C10D utilities, but these did not translate to relative differences over time or between groups. In NETTER-1, patients in the

Identifiers

PMID34260017
PMCPMC8611167
OpenAlexW3180431549

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.