ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2026
Do we agree on health state outcomes? A review of measurement agreement between time-trade off and other utility measures.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of this review is to investigate the measurement agreement of time trade-off (TTO) and direct/indirect health utility measurements methods. Discrepancies have been reported between utility elicitation methods, thus the study objective was to collect all empirical studies that investigated measurement by Bland-Altman analysis (BA) and estimate overall means differences.
methodsA systematic literature review was performed in 2025 April, on three online databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane) following PRISMA guideline to synthetize (1) original, (2) English language studies, (3) investigating measurement agreement between TTO and other direct and indirect utility measures (4) by BA. Bayesian meta-analysis was performed to estimate overall mean difference and heterogeneity between measures.
resultsOverall, n = 402 records were found, n = 41 assessed in full text and finally n = 12 studies were included into the synthesis. The studies covered nine different diseases, the mean TTO utility scores ranged between 0.96 (patient experienced myopia) and 0.42 (patient experienced colorectal cancer). The pooled means differences between the TTO and direct/indirect measures was small (-0.01 and 0.01), however the 95% lower-upper confidence intervals warns that mean estimates can deviate by 0.1 to 0.2. Moderate study heterogeneity (τ = 0.04 and τ = 0.13) also points on considerably varying utility results study-to-study.
conclusionBetween TTO and other direct/indirect utility measures our review found small mean differences, however significant between-study heterogeneity is indicating inconsistent measurement agreement. Currently, whether discrepancies arise from valuation technique, instrument properties, or study context remained undiscovered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42319642What 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.