ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025
Health utilities used in oncology cost-utility analyses: a registry-based analysis.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth utility is a key input used to perform cost-utility analysis (CUA), which is increasingly used to inform resource allocation decisions.
objectiveTo identify the sources and elicitation methods of health utilities used in CUAs in oncology.
methodsWe used the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry to identify oncology CUAs published in Medline between 1976 and 2021. Eligible CUAs had to include an oncology population (based on ICD-10 codes), report health utilities, and be published in English. The references of cited health utilities were traced to identify the original health utility study and the method of utility elicitation. Characteristic of included CUAs were summarized and the methods to derive health utilities were compared.
resultsA total of 1512 CUAs in oncology were identified. The majority of CUAs (n = 1428, 94.4%) were model-based. Malignant neoplasm of breast and female genital organs was the most common population considered (n = 424, 28.0%). Among these CUAs, 8714 health utilities were identified. Upon review, the sources of 2096 (24.1%) health utilities could not be traced. Of the remaining 6618 health utilities, 1718 (26.0%) were obtained from original health utility study embedded in CUA in which expert opinion (n = 547, 31.8%) or EQ-5D (n = 479, 27.9%) was most frequently used. The 4900 health utilities (74.0%) that were cited from external studies were most often derived using the standard gamble (n = 1258, 25.7%) or EQ-5D (n = 1190, 24.3%).
conclusionPublished health utilities are widely used in oncology CUAs, especially for model-based analyses. However, the identification, selection, and use of health utilities is suboptimal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39602020What 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.