ReviewPharmacoEconomics2022
Conceptual Framework for Optimised Proxy Value Set Selection Through Supra-National Value Set Development for the EQ-5D Instruments.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Protocol for the health economic evaluation of nature-based social prescribing against loneliness alongside the RECETAS trials.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Health-related quality of life in adults with epidermolysis bullosa: a cross-sectional study in seven European countries using EQ-5D-5L.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2026Article
- Article
- In varietate concordia - cluster analysis of EQ-5D-5L value sets in European Union countries.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Comparison of EQ-5D-Y-3L Utility Scores Using Nine Country-Specific Value Sets in Chinese Adolescents.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- The Estimate of Parental Quality of Life Loss Due to Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) Hospitalization.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreference differences between countries and populations justify the use of country-specific value sets for the EQ-5D instruments. There are no clear criteria based on which the selection of value sets for countries without a national value set should be made. As part of the European PECUNIA project, this study aimed to identify factors contributing to differences in preference-based valuations and develop supra-national value sets for homogenous country clusters in Europe.
methodsA literature review was conducted to identify factors relevant to variations in the EQ-5D-3L/5L health state valuations across countries. Factors fulfilling the pre-specified criteria of validity, reliability, international feasibility and comparability were used to group 27 European Union member states, the European Free Trade Association countries and the UK. Clusters of countries were developed based on the frequency of their appearance in the same grouping. The supra-national value sets were estimated for these clusters from the coefficients of existing published valuation studies using the ordinary least-squares model.
resultsTen factors were identified from 69 studies. From these, five grouping variables: (1) culture and religion; (2) linguistics; (3) healthcare system typology; (4) healthcare system financing; and (5) sociodemographic aspects were derived to define the groups of homogenous countries. Frequency-based grouping revealed five cohesive clusters: English-speaking, Nordic, Central-Western, Southern and Eastern European.
conclusionsEuropean countries were clustered considering variables that may relate to differences in health state valuations. Supra-national value sets provide optimised proxy value set selection in the lack of a national value set and/or for regional decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.