Search

Objective: The aim of this study is to provide Chinese utility weights for the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Utility Measure-Core 10 Dimensions (EORTC QLU-C10D) which is a preference-based cancer-specific utility instrument derived from the EORTC QLQ-C30. Methods: We conducted an online survey of the general population in China, with quota sampling for age and gender. Each respondent was asked to complete a discrete choice experimental survey consisting of 16 randomly selected choice sets. The conditional logit model and mixed logit model were used to analyze respondents' preferences, and the goodness of fit of the model was tested. Results: A total of 2003 respondents were included in the analysis. Utility decrements within dimensions were typically monotonic. Monotonic inconsistency issues in the Fatigue, Sleep, and Nausea dimensions were normalized by monotonicity correction. Physical functioning, Pain, and Role functioning were associated with the greatest utility weights, with the smallest decrements being in Bowel problems and Emotional functioning. The utility value for the worst health state was 0.083, i.e. slightly higher than being dead. Conclusions: This study provides the first China-specific set of value for the QLU-C10D based on societal preferences of the Chinese adult general population. The value set can be used as a cancer-specific scoring system for economic evaluations of new oncology therapies and technologies in China. Plain summary: This study provides the first China-specific set of value for the QLU-C10D based on societal preferences of the Chinese adult general population. The value set can be used as a cancer-specific scoring system for economic evaluations of new oncology therapies and technologies in China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Values that accompany generic health measures are typically anchored at 1 = full health and 0 = dead. Some health states may then be considered 'worse than dead' (WTD) and assigned negative values, which causes fundamental measurement problems. In this paper, we challenge the assumption that anchoring values at 'dead = 0' is necessary for quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) estimation. We summarise the role of 'dead' in health state valuation and consider three critical questions: (i) whether the measurement properties of health state values require 'dead'; (ii) whether 'dead' needs to be valued relative to health states; and (iii) whether values for states WTD are meaningful or useful. We conclude that anchoring 0 at dead is not a requirement of health status measurement or cost‐effectiveness analysis. This results from reframing QALYs as the relevant unit of measurement and reframing values as being derived from QALYs rather than the reverse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To summarise the diverse literature reporting the impact of COVID-19 on health utility in COVID-19 patients as well as in general populations being affected by COVID-19 control policies. Methods: A literature search up to April 2023 was conducted to identify papers reporting health utility in COVID-19 patients or in COVID-19-affected general populations. We present a narrative synthesis of the health utility values/losses of the retained studies to show the mean health utility values/losses with 95% confidence intervals. Mean utility values/losses for categories defined by medical attendance and data collection time were calculated using random-effects models. Results: In total, 98 studies—68 studies on COVID-19 patients and 30 studies on general populations—were retained for detailed review. Mean (95% CI) health utility values were 0.83 (0.81, 0.86), 0.78 (0.73, 0.83), 0.82 (0.78, 0.86) and 0.71 (0.65, 0.78) for general populations, non-hospitalised, hospitalised and ICU patients, respectively, irrespective of the data collection time. Mean utility losses in patients and general populations ranged from 0.03 to 0.34 and from 0.02 to 0.18, respectively. Conclusions: This scoping review provides a summary of the health utility impact of COVID-19 and COVID-19 control policies. COVID-19-affected populations were reported to have poor health utility, while a high degree of heterogeneity was observed across studies. Population- and/or country-specific health utility is recommended for use in future economic evaluation on COVID-19-related interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The visual analogue scale (VAS) has been used in the context of health and healthcare for various purposes, for example, to measure pain and to provide a single-index measure of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This scoping review aims to describe how the VAS has been used for health state valuation in the published literature. Methods: The search was carried out in Medline, Web of Science and PsycInfo. The findings of the included articles were tabulated and presented descriptively using frequencies and proportions. Results: The database search yielded 4856 unique articles, out of these, 308 were included. In 83% of the articles, the main purpose for using a VAS was to value health states. The two most common perspectives when valuing health states with a VAS were hypothetical (44%) and own health (34%). Some (n = 14) articles used the VAS in the context of economic evaluations, including calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A large variation in the design of the VAS was found, including the description of the lower and upper anchors. Advantages and disadvantages with using a VAS were mentioned in 14% of the included articles. Conclusion: The VAS has been a common method for valuing health states, both as a stand-alone method and in combination with other valuation methods. Despite its widespread use, the design of the VAS has been inconsistent which makes comparison of results across studies challenging. Further research on the role of using the VAS in economic evaluations is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To determine the effects of age, immigrant background, and poor self-reported health in a general population sample on the probability of non-completion or slow completion of the time trade-off (TTO). Methods: We used data from an interrupted Norwegian EQ-5D-5L valuation study conducted between 2019 and 2020. All participants responded to background items, irrespective of completion. We used mixed effect logistic regression analysis to assess the effect of old age, poor health, and immigrant background on the probability of non-completion of the TTO, and, for those who completed the TTO, of slow completion times. Results: First experiences from a Norwegian valuation study were that 29 (5.5%) respondents failed to complete the TTO tasks. For those reporting age over 65 years, poor health, or an immigrant background, 12% failed to complete the TTO. Adjusted odds ratios for predictors of non-completion were statistically significant (age > 65 years, 8.3; EQ-VAS ≤ 50, 3.49; immigrant background, 4.56). Being over 65 years or with an immigrant background also predicted slow completion of both the introduction and TTO tasks. Conclusions: High age, poor health, and immigrant status increased the risk of not being able to complete the TTO tasks, and of slow completion. Higher non-completion rates and increased completion times suggest that elements of the TTO may be demanding for some respondent groups, with possible implications for representativeness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The EQ VAS component of the EQ-5D questionnaire has been used to assess patients’ valuation of their own health besides its use for self-reporting of overall health status. The objective of the present study was to identify patients’ valuation of EQ-5D-3L health states using the EQ VAS in different patient groups over time and in comparison to the general population. Methods Data were obtained from patients from nine National Quality Registers (n = 172,070 patients) at baseline and at 1-year follow-up and compared with data from the general population (n = 41,761 participants). The correlation between EQ VAS scores and EQ-5D-3L index based on the Swedish experience-based VAS value set was assessed. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models were used to determine the association between EQ-5D-3L dimensions and EQ VAS valuation. Results EQ VAS scores showed consistency with severity of health states both at baseline and at 1-year follow-up in the nine selected EQ-5D-3L health states. The regression models showed mostly consistent decrements by severity levels in each dimension at both time points and similar to the general population. The dimension mainly associated with inconsistency was the self-care severity level three. Problems in the anxiety/depression dimension had the largest impact on overall health status in most of the patient groups and the general population. Conclusion The study has demonstrated the important role EQ VAS can play in revealing patients’ valuation of their health and showed the variation in valuation of EQ-5D-3L dimensions and levels of severity across different patient groups.

Objectives: The main aim of this study is to estimate a national value set of the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire for Iran. Methods: The composite time trade-off (cTTO) and discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods; and the protocol for EuroQol Portable Valuation Technology (EQ-PVT) were used to estimate the Iran national value set. 1179 face-to-face computer-assisted interviews were conducted with adults that were recruited from five Iran major cities in 2021. Generalized least squares, Tobit, heteroskedastic, logit, and hybrid models were used to analyze the data and to identify the best fitting model. Results: According to the logical consistency of the parameters, significance levels and prediction accuracy indices of the MAE; a heteroscedastic censored Tobit hybrid model combining cTTO and DCE responses was considered as the best fitting model to estimate the final value set. The predicted values ranged from − 1.19 for the worst health state (55555) to 1 for full health (11111), with 53.6% of the predicted values being negative. Mobility was the most influential dimension on health state preference values. Conclusions: The present study estimated a national EQ-5D-5L value set for Iranian policy makers and researchers. The value set enables the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire to use to calculate QALYs to assist the priority setting and efficient allocation of limited healthcare resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The EQ VAS component of the EQ-5D questionnaire has been used to assess patients' valuation of their own health besides its use for self-reporting of overall health status. The objective of the present study was to identify patients' valuation of EQ-5D-3L health states using the EQ VAS in different patient groups over time and in comparison to the general population. Methods: Data were obtained from patients from nine National Quality Registers (n = 172,070 patients) at baseline and at 1-year follow-up and compared with data from the general population (n = 41,761 participants). The correlation between EQ VAS scores and EQ-5D-3L index based on the Swedish experience-based VAS value set was assessed. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models were used to determine the association between EQ-5D-3L dimensions and EQ VAS valuation. Results: EQ VAS scores showed consistency with severity of health states both at baseline and at 1-year follow-up in the nine selected EQ-5D-3L health states. The regression models showed mostly consistent decrements by severity levels in each dimension at both time points and similar to the general population. The dimension mainly associated with inconsistency was the self-care severity level three. Problems in the anxiety/depression dimension had the largest impact on overall health status in most of the patient groups and the general population. Conclusion: The study has demonstrated the important role EQ VAS can play in revealing patients' valuation of their health and showed the variation in valuation of EQ-5D-3L dimensions and levels of severity across different patient groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Responses from hypothetical and experienced valuation tasks of health-related quality of life differ, yet there is limited understanding of why these differences exist, what members of the public think about them, and acceptable resolutions. This study explores public understanding of, opinions on, and potential solutions to differences between hypothetical versus experienced responses, in the context of allocating health resources. Methods: Six focus groups with 30 members of the UK adult public were conducted, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using framework analysis. Participants self-completed the EQ-5D-5L, before reporting the expected consequences of being in two hypothetical EQ-5D-5L health states for ten years. Second, participants were presented with prior results on the same task from a public (hypothetical) and patient (experienced) sample. Third, a semi-structured discussion explored participants': (1) understanding, (2) opinions, and (3) potential resolutions. Results: Twenty themes emerged, clustered by the three discussion points. Most participants found imagining the health states difficult without experience, with those aligned to mental health harder to understand. Participants were surprised that health resource allocation was based on hypothetical responses. They viewed experienced responses as more accurate, but noted potential biases. Participants were in favour of better informing, but not influencing the public. Other solutions included incorporating other perspectives (e.g., carers) or combining/weighting responses. Conclusion: Members of the UK public appear intuitively not to support using potentially uninformed public values to hypothetical health states in the context of health resource allocation. Acceptable solutions involve recruiting people with greater experience, including other/combinations of views, or better informing respondents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L, adult respondents are asked to complete composite time trade-off (cTTO) tasks for a 10-year-old child. Earlier work has shown that cTTO utilities elicited in such a child perspective are generally higher than when adults take their own perspective. We explore how differences in time preference in child and adult perspectives could explain this effect. Furthermore, as cTTO valuation in a child perspective involves explicit consideration of immediate death for a child, we also consider how cTTO utilities could be affected by decision-makers lexicographically avoiding death in children. We report the results of an experiment in which 219 respondents valued 5 health states in both adult and child perspectives with either a standard cTTO or a lead-time TTO only approach, in which immediate death is less focal. Time preferences were measured in both perspectives. Our results suggest that utilities were lower when lead-time TTO, rather than cTTO, was used. We find large heterogeneity in time preference in both perspectives, with predominantly negative time preference. The influence of time preferences on utilities, however, was small, and correcting for time preferences did not reduce differences between utilities elicited in both perspectives. Surprisingly, we found more evidence for differences in utilities between adult and child perspectives when lead-time TTO was used. Overall, these results suggest that time and lexicographic preferences affect time trade-off valuation in child and adult perspectives, but are not the explanation for differences between these perspectives. We discuss the implications of our findings for EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health state valuation attempts to evaluate health states based on the perception of individuals. The values are used to derive disability weights (DWs) —an important metric for estimation of disability-adjusted life years and thereby calculation of the burden of diseases. Several studies have calculated DWs using different methods of valuation, however, very few have attempted to explore the underlying cause for assigning values to different health states. This study aims to document the perceptions, preferences, and social context in assigning DWs to given health states. Methods: A total of 42 community members and 21 service providers (from public and private sectors) across urban and rural Odisha and Telangana were interviewed between July to September 2018. A face-to-face in-depth interview and a rank ordering technique through card sort exercise was employed to explore reasons and perceptions of individuals in the context of health states using the thematic framework approach. Findings: Six themes emerged through analysis: awareness of the health state, nature of the disease, disease consequences, treatment-related issues, social implications, and case burden. Each theme captured an individual's reason for valuing one health state as different from the other, with differences and/or similarities between community members and service providers. Conclusion: Our study provides a comprehensive comparison between contrasting groups of individuals, thereby suggesting mere acceptance of 'experts' reasoning may not always suffice. Further research studies in the future need to be conducted for a better insight into the health perspective of a culturally diverse community. It can also help estimate the burden of disease for decision making and resource allocation in developing countries.

Objectives: To evaluate and compare the test–retest reliability of discrete choice experiments with duration (DCETTO) and time trade-off (TTO) in the Chinese SF-6Dv2 valuation study. Methods: During face-to-face interviews, a representative sample of the Chinese general population completed 8 TTO tasks and 10 DCETTO tasks. Retest interviews were conducted after two weeks. For both DCETTO and TTO, the consistency of raw responses between the two tests was firstly evaluated at the individual level. Regressions were conducted to investigate the association between the test–retest reliability and the respondents' characteristics and the severity of health states. Consistency was then analyzed at the aggregate level by comparing the rank order of the coefficients of dimensions. Results: In total, 162 respondents (51.9% male; range 18–80 years) completed the two tests. The intraclass correlations coefficient 0.958 for TTO, with identical values accounting for 59.3% of observations. 76.4% of choices were identical for DCETTO, with a Kappa statistic of 0.528. Respondents' characteristics had no significant impact while the severity of health states valued in TTO and DCETTO tasks had a significant impact on the test–retest reliability. Both approaches produced relatively stable rank order of dimensions in constrained model estimations between test and retest data. Conclusions: Individual responses of both approaches are relatively stable over time. The rank orders of dimensions in model estimations between test and retest for TTO and DCETTO are also consistent. The differences of utility estimation between the two tests for DCETTO need to be further investigated based on a larger sample size. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health state valuation attempts to evaluate health states based on the perception of individuals. The values are used to derive disability weights (DWs) —an important metric for estimation of disability-adjusted life years and thereby calculation of the burden of diseases. Several studies have calculated DWs using different methods of valuation, however, very few have attempted to explore the underlying cause for assigning values to different health states. This study aims to document the perceptions, preferences, and social context in assigning DWs to given health states. Methods: A total of 42 community members and 21 service providers (from public and private sectors) across urban and rural Odisha and Telangana were interviewed between July to September 2018. A face-to-face in-depth interview and a rank ordering technique through card sort exercise was employed to explore reasons and perceptions of individuals in the context of health states using the thematic framework approach. Findings: Six themes emerged through analysis: awareness of the health state, nature of the disease, disease consequences, treatment-related issues, social implications, and case burden. Each theme captured an individual's reason for valuing one health state as different from the other, with differences and/or similarities between community members and service providers. Conclusion: Our study provides a comprehensive comparison between contrasting groups of individuals, thereby suggesting mere acceptance of 'experts' reasoning may not always suffice. Further research studies in the future need to be conducted for a better insight into the health perspective of a culturally diverse community. It can also help estimate the burden of disease for decision making and resource allocation in developing countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

to assess the feasibility of a new stated preference approach, the multiple bounded dichotomous choice (MBDC), designed to generate value sets for preference-based measurement of health-related quality of life. MBDC and standard gamble (SG) tasks were completed to derive SF-6Dv2 value sets from a sample of the general population in Quebec, Canada. Participants were randomized between the two approaches: 6 health states were evaluated in SG and 11 health states in MBDC. Several models were used to estimate data in each approach, and the preferred models were chosen by using mean absolute error (MAE), logical consistency of parameters, and significance levels. Results of MBDC were compared with SG in terms of acceptability (self-reported difficulty and quality levels in answering, and completion time), consistency (monotonicity of model coefficients), accuracy (standard errors), dimensions coefficient magnitude, correlation between the value sets estimated, and the range of estimated values. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was computed to assess value sets' consistency. Out of 655 individuals who completed MBDC tasks and 828 who completed SG tasks, a total of 585 participants for MBDC and 714 for SG tasks were included for analysis. The preferred models for both approaches were GLS Tobit. No significant difference was observed in self-reported difficulties and qualities in answers among approaches, but MBDC had less excluded participants and was less prone to report difficulties in answering. Additionally, completion time in the MBDC group was significantly lower (99.80 vs 68.12 s). Most standard errors in the MBDC were lower than those in SG, and the number of non-significant parameters was also lower. The range of utility values generated by MBDC tended to be wider (−0.372 to 1) than those generated by the SG (−0.137 to 1) and the number of worse-than-dead states in MBDC (0.91%) was higher than for SG (0.08%). The Pain dimension was identified as the most significant, while the Vitality dimension showed the lowest significant decrement. Both approaches exhibited a tendency to overestimate severe health state values and underestimate better health state values. The correlation and ICC between the two value sets were 0.937 and 0.983, respectively. Based on empirical evidence, it can be inferred that the MBDC method is not only feasible but also holds the potential to generate meaningful and well-informed preference data from respondents. This approach can be used to derive a value set for preference-based instrument. • First study to use the MBDC approach to generate health utilities. • MBDC approach is compared to the standard gamble (SG) approach. • MBDC is feasible and generates meaningful and well-informed preference data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The TTO task involves giving up life years, i.e. living a shorter life, to avoid an undesirable health state. Despite being a hypothetical task, some respondents take other life factors into account when completing the task. This study explored the effect of having children and/or a partner on TTO valuations of hypothetical EQ-5D-5L health states in a valuation study of the general population. Methods: The study used TTO data collected in a Norwegian EQ-5D-5L valuation study in 2019–2020, by one-to-one pc-assisted interviews following the EQ-VT protocol. We used regression modelling to determine the effect of significant others (having children or a partner) on disutility per health state from the TTO valuations. Results: 430 respondents were included [mean age 43.8 (SD 15.9) years, 58% female, 48% with children, 68% with a partner, 25% with neither children nor partner]. Having children and/or a partner was associated with lowered willingness to trade life years translating to higher elicited health state utilities (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Having significant others, or the lack of having significant others, was associated with respondents' valuation of hypothetical health states using TTO, more so than traditional sampling variables such as age and sex. Inadequate representativeness in terms of having significant others could bias health state preference values in valuation studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Examine whether the use of different ages has an impact on the valuation of EQ-5D-Y health states for a hypothetical child or adolescent. Methods A survey was administered during regular classes among a convenience sample of university students in the Netherlands. Respondents first valued 6 EQ-5D-Y health states (2 mild, 2 moderate, 2 severe) describing a hypothetical child/adolescent of a certain age on a visual analogue scale (VAS). After 1 h respondents valued the same six health states again but this time the age of the child was different. Age differed between 4, 10 and 16 year old. Results Number of respondents was 311. No significant differences in valuation of the six health states were found between the age of 10 and 16. One moderate health state was valued significantly better for a 4-year old compared to a 10 and a 16 year old. The same applied for one severe health state that was valued higher for a 4-year old compared to a 16-year old. Conclusion Our study shows that, except for one moderate and one severe health state, other EQ-5D-Y health states were not valued significantly different when description of age differed. It is possible that problems in specific health domains are considered more severe for older children/adolescents compared to younger children who might still be dependent on their caregivers. Future research should examine whether our findings are also present in a broader set of EQ-5D-Y health states, with a choice-based method like TTO or DCE, and a more heterogeneous sample.

Abstract Background Group deliberation can be a pathway to understanding reasons behind judgement decisions. This pilot study implemented a deliberative process to elicit public values about health‐related quality of life. In this study, participants deliberated scales and weights for a German adaption of the Short‐Form Six‐Dimension (SF‐6D) Version 2 from a public perspective. Objective This article examines the reasons participants stated for health state valuations and investigates the feasibility of eliciting public reasons for judgement decisions in a deliberative setting. Methods The 1‐day deliberation was guided by MACBETH as a method of multi‐criteria decision analysis and involved qualitative comparisons of SF‐6D health states and dimensions. Participants deliberated in parallel small groups and a subsequent plenary assembly. A qualitative content analysis was conducted to assess the value judgements and reasons behind them. Results A total of 34 students participated in the study. Common reasoning was the level of impairment, marginal benefit, possibility of adjustment and expectation satisfaction. While the small groups agreed on scales for the SF‐6D dimensions, the plenary assembly did not reach consensus on one scale and dimension weights. When dimensions were prioritized, these were pain and mental health. Conclusions While no consented value set was derived, this pilot study presents a promising approach for eliciting public reasoning behind judgements on health state values. Furthermore, it demonstrates that participants consider diverse motives when valuing health‐related quality of life.

BackgroundIndia is undergoing a rapid demographic and epidemiologic transition. Thus demanding prioritization of diseases based on burden estimation is befitting our cultural diversity. Disability weights (DWs) by Global burden of disease (GBD) studies may not be representative. Hence, a study was conducted to estimate state-specific disability weights to capture the community health perceptions that included urban–rural settings as well as different socio-economic and literacy levels.MethodsA total of 2,055 community members (participants) from two distinct states of India, Odisha and Telangana, were interviewed to assign disability weights to the selected 14 health states based on the state burden and relevance. Each health state was described to the participants using pictorial representations of the health states and valuated using visual analog scale and card sort methods.ResultsWe noted that DWs in Odisha ranged from 0.32 (0.30–0.34) for upper limb fracture due to road traffic accident (least severe) to 0.90 (0.88–0.93) for breast cancer (most severe) among the 14 health states. While, in Telangana, diarrhea was considered least severe [DW = 0.22 (0.19–0.24)] and breast cancer remained most severe [DW = 0.85 (0.83–0.88)] as in Odisha. Marked difference in the DWs for other health states was also seen. Further, on comparison of community weights with GBD weights using Spearman correlation, we observed a low correlation (ρ = 0.104).ConclusionOur study provides community-based findings that show how participants valued noncommunicable diseases higher than short-term ailments or infectious diseases. Additionally, the low correlation between GBD also suggests the need for local disability weights rather than universal acceptance. We therefore recommend that decisions in policy-making, especially for resource allocation and priority setting, need to be based not only on expert opinion but also include community in accordance with high scientific standards.

(1) To descriptively compare the selected elements of valuation methods for EQ-5D-5L value set studies, (2) to compare the characteristics of the value sets, and (3) to examine the associations between the selected elements of valuation methods and the EQ-5D-5L value sets. A systematic literature search of EQ-5D-5L valuation studies from 1 January 2009 to 22 April 2021 was conducted in selected databases. Following the initial search, we also explored additional studies published during the completion of the final version of the manuscript. Similarities and variations for selected elements of valuation methods were descriptively compared. The relative importance of dimensions, utility decrements between the levels, and distribution of the utility scores were used to compare value sets. A meta-regression analysis examined the associations between the selected methodological elements and the utility scores and dimension levels of EQ-5D-5L. A total of 31 studies were included in this review. Methodological similarities centered around data collection and preference elicitation method. On the other hand, variations include sampling technique, sample size, and value set modeling. The variations in value sets based on the relative importance of dimension, decrement in utility score, and distribution of utility score across countries were observed. Although the distribution of the utility scores differed across countries, higher levels of each dimension tended to have a larger decrement in the utility scores. Mean utility scores for the experience-based value sets were higher than those estimated using stated choice methods. The selected methodological elements were not significantly associated with the mean predicted utility scores or most dimension-level coefficients. EQ-5D-5L health state valuation methods and characteristics of value sets differed across studies. The impact of the variation of methodological elements on the value sets should be further investigated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A few instruments that identify and valuate health states are based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health States of the World Health Organization. One of them is the Health State Description (HSD) questionnaire first used in the World Health Survey (WHS) initiative (HSD-WHS), whose psychometric properties have not been evaluated in Chile. Additionally, the use of latent variables for the valuation process of health states has been scarcely investigated in the context of population health metrics. We aim to evaluate the psychometric properties and factorial structure of the HSD-WHS for Chile and describe a latent variable method for valuating health states associated with diseases. We used data from the second Chilean National Health population-based survey from 2009 to 2010 (N = 5293). We explored the factorial structure of the HSD-WHS through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, the reliability, and the discriminant validity of the latent variable of disability. Disability weights for diseases were calculated using a linear regression model. We found an adequate goodness of fit for a second-order model with 9 factors corresponding to disability domains (Tucker–Lewis index = 0.99, comparative fit index = 0.99, root mean square error of approximation = 0.060), and good reliability estimates (standardized α = 0.91). The rescaled (between 0 and 100) latent variable of disability showed significant difference according to the explored variables. We estimated disability weights for the following: (1) depressive episode, 13.6 (12.1-15.2), (2) hypertension, 1.6 (0.0-3.3), and (3) diabetes, 5.0 (2.5-7.4). This study supports the use of the HSD-WHS questionnaire in the Chilean population and a latent variable approach for valuating health states associated with diseases. • The psychometric properties of the Health State Description-World Health Survey (HSD-WHS) questionnaire have been scarcely studied in the context of the WHS initiative. • The use of latent variable methods for valuating health states associated with diseases has been poorly studied in the context of population health metrics. • The HSD-WHS shows adequate psychometric properties and factorial structure in the Chilean population. • The latent variable approach seems to be a practical way for valuating health states associated with diseases, especially in the analysis of National Health Surveys. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: EQ-5D-Y-3L health states are valued by adults taking the perspective of a 10-year-old child. Compared to valuation of adult EQ-5D instruments, this entails two changes to the perspective: (i) child health states are valued instead of adult health states and: (ii) health states are valued for someone else instead of for oneself. Although earlier work has shown that these combined changes yield different values for child and adult health states that are otherwise equal, it currently remains unclear why. Hence, we aimed to disentangle the effects of both changes. Methods: A sample of 205 students (mean age: 19.48) was surveyed. Each respondent completed visual analogue scale (VAS) and time trade-off (TTO) tasks for five EQ-5D-Y-3L states, using four randomly ordered perspectives: (i) self-adult (themselves), (ii) other-adult (someone their age), (iii) self-child (themselves as a 10-year-old), (iv) other-child (a child of 10 years old). We compared how each perspective impacted outcomes, precision and quality of EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation. Results: Overall, differences between perspectives were consistent, with their direction being dependent on the health states and respondents. For VAS, the effect on outcomes of valuation depended on severity, but variance was higher in valuation with child perspectives. For TTO, we observed that EQ-5D-Y-3L states valued on behalf of others (i.e., children or adults) received higher valuations, but lower variances. Conclusion: The use of a different perspective appears to yield systematic differences in EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation, with considerable heterogeneity between health states and respondents. This may explain mixed findings in earlier work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Health economists have shown a growing interest in deliberation and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) as possible pathways to transparently integrate value judgments in cost-utility analyses. In line with these developments, this study piloted a consensus process to derive a German value set for the Short-Form Six-Dimension (SF-6D). In a conference setting, a group was tasked to deliberate on scores and weights for the SF-6D from the perspective of a self-determined and independent life. Methods The one-day consensus conference was based on a deliberative process in combination with the MCDA method MACBETH (Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique). According to MACBETH, participants were asked to qualitatively rate pairwise comparisons of SF-6D health states. The scoring within each dimension was conducted in parallel group sessions. Final agreement on the scores as well as weights for the SF-6D dimensions were derived in a subsequent plenary assembly. Results were analyzed using the software M-MACBETH and qualitative content analysis. Results A total of 34 participants were recruited. While each of the 6 small groups presented a consented score, the plenary assembly reached consensus on all dimensions apart from pain. Concerning dimension weights, some participants favored prioritizing pain and mental health. Others disputed that trade-offs between dimensions and thus assigning weights were not acceptable in a context where this may involve withholding care from someone. As a consequence, no consensus on a value set was reached. Participants identified the group size of the plenary session and the applied weighting procedure as main obstacles to the process. Conclusions This pilot study presents a consensus-based approach for valuing health-related quality of life. However, further research is needed on deliberative processes that yield quantifiable results. Future conferences should explore smaller group sizes, longer durations of the deliberative process and alternatives to the additive value function applied in MACBETH.

Objectives: The recently published EQ-5D-Y valuation protocol prescribes the general public values EQ-5D-Y health states for a 10-year-old child. This child perspective differs from the individual perspective applied for valuation of adult EQ-5D instruments. This article discusses the rationale for and implications of applying a child perspective for EQ-5D-Y health state valuation.Methods: This article was informed by an exploration of the normative and empirical literature on health state valuation. We identified and summarized key discussion points in a narrative review.Results: Although valuing EQ-5D-Y health states from an individual perspective is feasible, it may be problematic for several reasons. The use of a child perspective implies that-rather than valuing one's own health-someone else's health is valued. This may require the projection of one's own beliefs, expectations, and preferences on others, which could change the decision processes underlying the elicited preferences. Furthermore, because preferences are obtained for a 10-year-old child, it is unclear if this given age as well as other (missing) information on the described child beneficiary (should) affect valuation of EQ-5D-Y health states.Conclusions: The change from an individual to a child perspective in the valuation of EQ-5D-Y will likely lead to differences in utilities. This has implications for the estimation of incremental health-related quality-of-life gains in economic evaluations of health technologies for children and adolescents and therefore might affect reimbursement decisions. Further research is necessary for gaining insight into the extent to which this impact is normatively and empirically justified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Examine whether the use of different ages has an impact on the valuation of EQ-5D-Y health states for a hypothetical child or adolescent.Methods: A survey was administered during regular classes among a convenience sample of university students in the Netherlands. Respondents first valued 6 EQ-5D-Y health states (2 mild, 2 moderate, 2 severe) describing a hypothetical child/adolescent of a certain age on a visual analogue scale (VAS). After 1 h respondents valued the same six health states again but this time the age of the child was different. Age differed between 4, 10 and 16 year old.Results: Number of respondents was 311. No significant differences in valuation of the six health states were found between the age of 10 and 16. One moderate health state was valued significantly better for a 4-year old compared to a 10 and a 16 year old. The same applied for one severe health state that was valued higher for a 4-year old compared to a 16-year old.Conclusion: Our study shows that, except for one moderate and one severe health state, other EQ-5D-Y health states were not valued significantly different when description of age differed. It is possible that problems in specific health domains are considered more severe for older children/adolescents compared to younger children who might still be dependent on their caregivers. Future research should examine whether our findings are also present in a broader set of EQ-5D-Y health states, with a choice-based method like TTO or DCE, and a more heterogeneous sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Standard gamble (SG) typically yields higher health state valuations than time trade-off (TTO), which may be caused by biases affecting both methods. It has been suggested that TTO yields more accurate health state valuations, because TTO is subject to both upward and downward biases that may cancel out. Verifying this claim, however, would require a golden standard to test validity against. In this study, we attempted to provide a first direct test of the validity of health state valuation. A total of 119 students completed five TTO and SG tasks. Afterwards, their health state valuations elicited with TTO and SG were shown to them in an interactive graph. Respondents were asked to indicate which of the methods represented their valuation of a health state best. They could also adjust their valuation. Overall, we found that respondents indicated that TTO valuations better reflected health state valuations, a result that was more pronounced for more severe health states. When offered the opportunity, on average, respondents adjusted health state valuations downwards. These findings may have implications for future work on (bias correction in) health state valuations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a growing interest in health technology assessment and economic evaluations in developing countries such as Ethiopia. The objective of this study was to derive an EQ-5D-5L value set from the Ethiopian general population to facilitate cost utility analysis. A nationally representative sample (N = 1050) was recruited using a stratified multistage quota sampling technique. Face-to-face, computer-assisted interviews using the EuroQol Portable Valuation Technology (EQ-PVT) protocol of composite time trade-off (c- TTO) and discrete choice experiments (DCEs) were undertaken to elicit preference scores. The feasibility of the EQ-PVT protocol was pilot tested in a sample of the population (n = 110). A hybrid regression model combining c- TTO and DCE data was used to estimate the final value set. In the pilot study, the acceptability of the tasks was good, and there were no special concerns with undertaking the c -TTO and DCE tasks. The coefficients generated from a hybrid model were logically consistent. The predicted values for the EQ-5D-5L ranged from −0.718 to 1. Level 5 anxiety/depression had the largest impact on utility decrement (−0.458), whereas level 5 self-care had the least impact (−0.222). The maximum predicted value beyond full health was 0.974 for the 11112 health state. This is the first EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Africa using international valuation methods (c -TTO and DCE) and also the first using the EQ-PVT protocol to derive a value set. We expect that the availability of this value set will facilitate health technology assessment and health-related quality-of-life research and inform policy decision making in Ethiopia. • There is a growing interest in health technology assessment and economic evaluation in low-resource settings such as Ethiopia. • This study developed a value set for the EQ-5D-5L using an Ethiopian general population sample with the EuroQol Group–Portable Valuation Technology (EQ-PVT) protocol administered in Amharic. • The new value set provides local users with societal preferences that are relevant. • The study also established the feasibility of using the less resource-intensive EQ-PVT, which is relevant for future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: In recent years, discrete choice experiments (DCEs) have become frequently used to generate utility values, but there are a diverse range of approaches to do this. The primary focus of this systematic review is to summarise the methods used for the design and analysis of DCEs when estimating utility values in both generic and condition-specific preference-based measures. Methods: Published literature using DCEs to estimate utility values from preference-based instruments were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and CINAHL using PRISMA guidelines. To assess the different DCE methods, standardised information was extracted from the articles including the DCE design method, the number of choice sets, the number of DCE pairs per person, randomisation of questions, analysis method, logical consistency tests and techniques for anchoring utilities. The CREATE checklist was used to assess the quality of the studies. Results: A total of 38 studies with samples from the general population, students and patients were included. Values for health states described using generic multi attribute instruments (MAUIs) (especially the EQ-5D) were the most commonly explored using DCEs. The studies showed considerable methodology and design diversity (number of alternatives, attributes, sample size, choice task presentation and analysis). Despite these differences, the quality of articles reporting the methods used for the DCE was generally high. Conclusion: DCEs are an important approach to measure utility values for both generic and condition-specific instruments. However, a gold standard method cannot yet be recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Preference-based instruments measuring health status express the value of specific health states in a single number. One method used is time trade-off (TTO). Health-status values are key elements in calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and are pertinent for resource allocation. Since they are used in economic evaluations of healthcare, searching for a theoretical foundation of TTO in economics is justified.Area Covered: This paper provides an overview of TTO, including its relation to economic theory, and discusses biases and distortions, compiled from recent and older research. Inconsistencies between TTO and random utility theory were detected; The TTO is confounded by time preferences and by respondents' life expectancies. TTO is cognitively challenging, therefore guidance during the interviews is needed, producing interview effects. TTO does not measure one thing at a time, nor are the values independent of other states that are being valued in the same task. That is, TTO does not exhibit theoretical measurement properties such as unidimensionality and the invariance principle.Expert Opinion: We conclude that the TTO may be a pragmatic method of eliciting health state values, but the limitations in regard to measurement theory and practical elicitation problems makes it prone to inconsistencies and arbitrariness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To determine and critically evaluate the arguments in the published literature regarding the most accurate source of information for valuation of health states: values based on experienced health states (patient values) or values based on described health states (general public values). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. The English National Health Service publishes hospital performance indicators based on average postoperative EQ-5D index scores after hip replacement surgery to inform prospective patients' choices of hospital. Unidimensional index scores are derived from multidimensional health-related quality-of-life data using preference weights estimated from a sample of the UK general population. This raises normative concerns if general population preferences differ from those of the patients who are to be informed. This study explores how the source of valuation affects hospital performance estimates. Methods. Four different value sets reflecting source of valuation (general population v. patients), valuation technique (visual analog scale [VAS] v. time tradeoff [TTO]), and experience with health states (currently experienced vs. experimentally estimated) were used to derive and compare performance estimates for 243 hospitals. Two value sets were newly estimated from EQ-5D-3L data on 122,921 hip replacement patients and 3381 members of the UK general public. Changes in hospital ranking (nationally) and performance outlier status (nationally; among patients' 5 closest hospitals) were compared across valuations. Results. National rankings were stable under different valuations (rank correlations >0.92). Twenty-three (9.5%) hospitals changed outlier status when using patient VAS valuations instead of general population TTO valuations, the current approach. Outlier status also changed substantially at the local level. This was explained mostly by the valuation technique, not the source of valuations or experience with the health states. Limitations. No patient TTO valuations were available. The effect of value set characteristics could be established only through indirect comparisons. Conclusion. Different value sets may lead to prospective patients choosing different hospitals. Normative concerns about the use of general population valuations are not supported by empirical evidence based on VAS valuations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. The ICECAP-O and the ICECAP-A are validated capability well-being instruments. To be used in economic evaluations, multidimensional instruments require weighting of the distinguished well-being states. These weights are usually obtained through ex ante preference elicitation (i.e., decision utility) but could also be based on experienced utility. Objective. This article describes the development of value sets for ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A based on experienced utility and compares them with current decision utility weights. Methods. Data from 2 cross-sectional samples corresponding to the target groups of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A were used in 2 separate analyses. The utility impacts of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels were assessed through regression models using a composite measure of subjective well-being as a proxy for experienced utility. The observed utility impacts were rescaled to match the 0 to 1 range of the existing value set. Results. The calculated experienced utility values were similar to the decision utility weights for some of the ICECAP dimensions but deviated for others. The largest differences were found for weights of the ICECAP-O dimension enjoyment and the ICECAP-A dimensions attachment and autonomy. Conclusions. The results suggest a different weighting of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels if experienced utility is used instead of decision utility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Group deliberation can be a pathway to understanding reasons behind judgement decisions. This pilot study implemented a deliberative process to elicit public values about health‐related quality of life. In this study, participants deliberated scales and weights for a German adaption of the Short‐Form Six‐Dimension (SF‐6D) Version 2 from a public perspective. Objective: This article examines the reasons participants stated for health state valuations and investigates the feasibility of eliciting public reasons for judgement decisions in a deliberative setting. Methods: The 1‐day deliberation was guided by MACBETH as a method of multi‐criteria decision analysis and involved qualitative comparisons of SF‐6D health states and dimensions. Participants deliberated in parallel small groups and a subsequent plenary assembly. A qualitative content analysis was conducted to assess the value judgements and reasons behind them. Results: A total of 34 students participated in the study. Common reasoning was the level of impairment, marginal benefit, possibility of adjustment and expectation satisfaction. While the small groups agreed on scales for the SF‐6D dimensions, the plenary assembly did not reach consensus on one scale and dimension weights. When dimensions were prioritized, these were pain and mental health. Conclusions: While no consented value set was derived, this pilot study presents a promising approach for eliciting public reasoning behind judgements on health state values. Furthermore, it demonstrates that participants consider diverse motives when valuing health‐related quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quality-Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs) are typically derived from individual preferences over health episodes. This paper reports the first experimental investigation into the effects of collective decision making on health valuations, using both time trade-off (TTO) and standard gamble (SG) tasks. We investigated collective decision making in dyads, by means of a mixed-subjects design where we control for learning effects. Our data suggest that collective decision making has little effect on decision quality, as no effects were observed on decision consistency and monotonicity for both methods. Furthermore, QALY weights remained similar between individual and collective decisions, and the typical difference in elicited weights between TTO and SG was not affected. These findings suggest that consulting with others has little effect on health state valuation, although learning may have. Additionally, our findings add to the literature of the effect of collective decision making, suggesting that no such effect occurs for TTO and SG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The use of preference-elicitation tasks for valuing health states is well established, but little is known about whether these preferences are informed. Preferences may not be informed because individuals with little experience of ill health are asked to value health states. The use of uninformed preferences in cost-effectiveness can result in sub-optimal resource allocation. The aim of this study was to pilot a novel method to assess whether members of the public are informed about health states they value in preference-elicitation tasks. Methods The general public was said to be informed if the expectations of the public about the effect of ill health on people’s lives were in agreement with the experience of patients. Sixty-two members of the public provided their expectations of the consequences of ill health on five life domains (activities, enjoyment, independence, relationships, and avoiding being a burden). A secondary dataset was used to measure patient experience on those five consequences. Results There were differences between the expectations of the public and the experience of patients. For example, for all five life consequences the public underestimated the effects of problems in usual activities compared to problems in mobility. They also underestimated the effect of ‘anxiety or depression’ compared to physical problems on enjoyment of life and on the quality of personal relationships. Conclusions This proof-of-concept study showed that it is possible to test whether preferences are informed. This study should be replicated using a larger sample. The findings suggest that preferences over health states in this sample are not fully informed because the participants do not have accurate expectations about the consequences of ill health. These uninformed preferences may not be adequate for allocation of public resources, and research is needed into methods to make them better informed.

For the prioritization of the allocation of national resources, estimating the burden of disease studies play a critical role. Hence the first Global Burden of Disease study conducted in the 1990s was done for this particular estimation. By the means of introducing disability-adjusted life year (DALY) metric, the burden of various diseases was calculated using disability weights (DWs)—a component of DALY. DWs are values that capture individuals' perception regarding the severity of diseases that involve valuation tools and health state descriptions. Various studies have been conducted over the past few decades to evaluate health states and derive disease-specific disability weights using Person-Trade off, Time-trade off, etc. However, use of these complex and cognitively demanding methods has been carried out in developed countries where the bulk of the populace is more educated. Few attempts have been made in low- and middle-income countries such as India, where not only the majority is less educated but also the social construction of diseases and health conditions are diverse. Therefore, due to the absence of methodological protocols of health state valuations for application at the community-level in the developing world, we attempted to systematically describe the procedure that can be used universally and cross-culturally for various health states. We began with the tentative selection of health states and health states valuation methods by conducting a meticulous literature review, followed by community exploration and medical consultations. This led to developing vignettes (clinical description) and 6D5L pictorial narrations (functional status description). Two field tests for checking the usability and refinement of the tools was done. Final consultation by an expert panel comprising of medical and non-medical professionals was held/conducted to finalize the health state labels and functional status profiles of each health state. The methodical approach provides a robust and thorough procedure for guiding researchers to implement health state valuation studies at community level.

Purpose: Open-ended and iteration-based time trade-off (TTO) tasks can both be used for valuation of health states. It has so far not been examined how the elicitation procedure affects the valuation of experience-based health states. The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of elicitation procedure on experience-based health state values elicited by the TTO method.Methods: 156 Chinese adults with type 2 diabetes participated in face-to-face interviews with an open-ended or an iteration-based TTO task. The association between the type of TTO task and the valuation of health states was investigated through multiple linear regression analyses. A modified open-ended TTO task was also developed (n = 33) to test whether different phrasings of open-ended TTO tasks influence TTO values.Results: Higher TTO values were observed in the original open-ended TTO task compared to the iteration-based task, which indicates that the elicitation procedure influences the valuation of health states. When the modified open-ended task was introduced, the difference between the two elicitation procedures was no longer statistically significant, suggesting that the phrasing and/or visual presentation of the TTO task may influence the valuation of health states.Conclusions: The choice of elicitation procedure as well as the description of experience-based TTO tasks may influence the valuation of health states. Further research is warranted, also in other cultural contexts, to further explore these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The EORTC QLU-C10D is a new multi-attribute utility instrument derived from the widely used cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-C30. It contains 10 dimensions (physical functioning, role functioning, social functioning, emotional functioning, pain, fatigue, sleep, appetite, nausea, bowel problems), each with four levels. The aim of this study was to provide U.K. general population utility weights for the QLU-C10D. A U.K. online panel was quota-sampled to align the sample to the general population proportions of sex and age (≥18 years). The online valuation survey included a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Each participant was asked to complete 16 choice-pairs, each comprising two QLU-C10D health states plus duration. DCE data were analysed using conditional logistic regression to generate utility weights. Data from 2,187 respondents who completed at least one choice set were included in the DCE analysis. The final U.K. QLU-C10D utility weights comprised decrements for each level of each health dimension. For nine of the 10 dimensions (all except appetite), the expected monotonic pattern was observed across levels: Utility decreased as severity increased. For the final model, consistent monotonicity was achieved by merging inconsistent adjacent levels for appetite. The largest utility decrements were associated with physical functioning and pain. The worst possible health state (the worst level of each dimension) is -0.083, which is considered slightly worse than being dead. The U.K.-specific utility weights will enable cost-utility analysis (CUA) for the economic evaluation of new oncology therapies and technologies in the United Kingdom, where CUA is commonly used to inform resource allocation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health economists ask members of the general public to value health states, but it is recognized that individuals construct their preferences during the valuation tasks. Conventional methods rely on one-off interviews that do not give participants time to reflect and deliberate on their preferences.Objective: This study investigates the effect of reflection and deliberation on health state preferences using the EQ-5D questionnaire and time trade-off valuation method.Methods: A novel concurrent explanatory mixed-methods design is used to investigate the explanation for the quantitative findings.Results: A total of 57 participants in the United Kingdom valued health states before and after a group-based deliberation exercise. There were large changes in health state values at the individual level, but the changes canceled out at the aggregate level. The mixed-methods findings suggest deliberation did not reveal new information or reduce inconsistencies in reasoning but rather focused on an exchange of personal subjective beliefs. In cases of disagreement, the participants accepted but did not adopt other participants' opinions. Participants remained uncertain about the relevance of their experiences and about their values.Conclusions: The evidence suggests that reflection and deliberation, as designed in this study, are unlikely to result in large systematic changes of health state values. The uncertainties expressed by participants means future research should investigate whether preferences are informed or whether providing participants with more information helps them construct their preferences with more certainty. The mixed-methods design used is a promising design to help elucidate the reasons for quantitative findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This article explains how to optimize Bayesian D-efficient discrete choice experiment (DCE) designs for the estimation of quality-adjusted life year (QALY) tariffs that are unconfounded by respondents' time preferences.Methods: The calculation of Bayesian D-errors is explained for DCE designs that allow for the disentanglement of respondents' time and health-state preferences. Time preferences are modelled via an exponential, hyperbolic, or power discount function and the performance of the proposed DCE designs is compared with that of several conventional DCE designs that do not take nonlinear time preferences into account.Results: Based on the achieved D-error, asymptotic standard error, and estimated sample size to obtain statistically significant estimates of the discount rate parameters, the proposed designs outperform the conventional DCE designs.Conclusions: We recommend that applied researchers use appropriately optimized DCE designs for the estimation of QALY tariffs that are corrected for time preferences. The TPC-QALY software package that accompanies this article makes the recommended designs easily accessible for health-state valuation researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of different health-related quality-of-life valuation methods in a new setting. Based on a small feasibility study of 100 young Russians, we trialed different methodologies and identified key differences that have implications for the development of health technology assessment in Russia. In face-to-face interviews, respondents completed a series of health self-assessments based on a modified version of the EQ-5D-3L, visual analogue scale, time tradeoff, standard gamble, and best–worst scaling methodologies, covering actual and hypothetical health states. We found that (1) the visual analogue scale produced lower health valuations and fewer logical inconsistencies than either time trade-off or standard gamble methodologies; (2) initial health states can be decisive in determining values assigned to health improvements; (3) respondents evaluate abstract health states more positively than their own actual health states; (4) there is evidence consistent with the hypothesis that actual and hypothetical health state valuation, using EQ-5D-3L, is an artifact of understanding rather than preference and that the incorporation of additional levels may therefore be no panacea if the dimensions themselves overlook important attributes; and (5) the country context is important in determining how respondents relate to the survey tools and how those survey tools are translated and delivered. Russia is commencing its health technology assessment journey and should proceed cautiously as it moves toward the valuation of health benefits. These results suggest a useful framework for a more in-depth development of health valuation methodologies in Russia. i. What is already known about the topic? There is a stark absence of evidence in Russia related to the use of health outcome valuation and measurement in guiding the allocation of healthcare resources. ii. What does the paper add to existing knowledge? This research represents the first step in exploring preference elicitation methodologies in Russia. iii. What insights does the paper provide for informing health care-related decision making? The relatively few attempts to include health related quality of life in intervention studies have had limited influence in Russia due to poor methodology, the absence of an established scientific literature and the lack of established population norms. This paper provides preliminary results concerning the different measurement instruments and therefore advances discussion around the development of Health Technology Assessment in Russia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Researchers often justify excluding some responses in studies eliciting valuations of health states as not representing respondents' true preferences. Here, we examine the effects of applying 8 common exclusion criteria on societal utility estimates. Setting. An online survey of a US nationally representative sample (N = 1164) used the standard gamble method to elicit preferences for health states defined by 7 health domains from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®). Methods. We estimate the impacts of applying 8 commonly used exclusion criteria on mean utility values for each domain, using beta regression, a form of analysis suited to double-bounded scales, such as utility. Results. Exclusion criteria have varied effects on the utility functions for the different PROMIS health domains. As a result, applying those criteria would have varied effects on the value of treatments (and side effects) that change health status on those domains. Limitations. Although our method could be applied to any health utility judgments, the present estimates reflect the features of the study that produced them. Those features include the selected health domains, standard gamble method, and an online format that excluded some groups (e.g., visually impaired and illiterate individuals). We also examined only a subset of all possible exclusion criteria, selected to represent the space of possibilities, as characterized in a companion article. Conclusions. Exclusion criteria can affect estimates of the societal utility of health states. We use those effects, in conjunction with the results of the companion article, to make suggestions for selecting exclusion criteria in future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. In a systematic review, Engel et al. found large variation in the exclusion criteria used to remove responses held not to represent genuine preferences in health state valuation studies. We offer an empirical approach to characterizing the similarities and differences among such criteria. Setting. Our analyses use data from an online survey that elicited preferences for health states defined by domains from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®), with a U.S. nationally representative sample (N = 1164). Methods. We use multidimensional scaling to investigate how 10 commonly used exclusion criteria classify participants and their responses. Results. We find that the effects of exclusion criteria do not always match the reasons advanced for applying them. For example, excluding very high and very low values has been justified as removing aberrant responses. However, people who give very high and very low values prove to be systematically different in ways suggesting that such responses may reflect different processes. Conclusions. Exclusion criteria intended to remove low-quality responses from health state valuation studies may actually remove deliberate but unusual ones. A companion article examines the effects of the exclusion criteria on societal utility estimates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Common health state valuation methodologies, such as standard gamble (SG) and time trade-off (TTO), typically produce different weights for identical health states. We attempt to alleviate these differences by correcting the confounding influences modeled in prospect theory: loss aversion and probability weighting. Furthermore, we correct for nonlinear utility of life duration. In contrast to earlier attempts at correcting TTO and SG weights, we measure and correct all these tenets simultaneously, using newly developed nonparametric methodology. These corrections were applied to three less-than-perfect health states, measured with TTO and SG. We found considerable loss aversion and probability weighting for both gains and losses in life years, and we observe concave utility for gains and convex utility for losses in life years. After correction, the initially significant differences in weights between TTO and SG disappeared for all health states. Our findings suggest new opportunities to account for bias in health state valuations but also the need for further validation of resulting weights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. The EQ-5D instrument has 5 dimensions. This article reports on the effects of manipulating a) the order in which the 5 dimensions are presented (appearing first v. last), b) splitting of the composite dimensions ("pain or discomfort" and "anxiety or depression"), and c) removing or "bolting off" 1 of the 5 EQ-5D dimensions at a time. The effects were examined in 2 contexts: 1) self-reporting health and 2) health state valuations. Methods. Three different types of discrete choice experiments (DCE) including a duration attribute were designed. An online survey with 12 subtypes, each with 10 DCE tasks, was designed and completed by 2494 members of the UK general public. Results. Of the 3 manipulations in the self-reporting context, only b) splitting anxiety or depression had a significant effect. In the health state valuation context, b) splitting level 5 pain or discomfort (relative to pain) and splitting level 5 anxiety or depression (relative to anxiety) had significant effects as did c) bolting off dimensions. Conclusions. We find that the values given to certain health dimensions are sensitive to the way in which it is described and the other health dimensions presented. Of particular interest is the effect of splitting composite dimensions: a given EQ-5D(-5L) profile may mean different things depending on whether the profile is used to self-report one's health or to value hypothetical states, so that the health state values of EQ-5D(-5L) in population tariffs may not correspond to the states that patients self-report themselves in. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Standard methods for eliciting the preference data upon which 'value sets' are based generally have in common an aim to 'uncover' people's preferences by asking them to evaluate a subset of health states, then using their responses to infer their preferences over all dimensions and levels. An alternative approach is to ask people directly about the relative importance to them of the dimensions, levels and interactions between them. This paper describes a new stated preference approach for directly eliciting personal utility functions (PUFs), and reports a pilot study to test its feasibility for valuing the EQ-5D.Methods: A questionnaire was developed, designed to directly elicit PUFs from general public respondents via computer-assisted personal interviews, with a focus on helping respondents to reflect and deliberate on their preferences. The questionnaire was piloted in England.Results: Seventy-six interviews were conducted in December 2015. Overall, pain/discomfort and mobility were found to be the most important of the EQ-5D dimensions. The ratings for intermediate improvements in each dimension show heterogeneity, both within and between respondents. Almost a quarter of respondents indicated that no EQ-5D health states are worse than dead.Discussion: The PUF approach appears to be feasible, and has the potential to yield meaningful, well-informed preference data from respondents that can be aggregated to yield a value set for the EQ-5D. A deliberative approach to health state valuation also has the potential to complement and develop existing valuation methods. Further refinement of some elements of the approach is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to explore how people value the state of health and what socio-economic factors they might consider. I conducted an online experiment and a survey to elicit individuals’ decisions under hypothetical health states, which vary at three levels: mild, moderate, and severe. The socio-economic factors mainly include payment, personal financial situation, hospital service, support from their family, etc. The subjects were from two separate online pools of the United States and Canada, which have similar socio-economic backgrounds and different health care systems. This paper presents that subjects are sensitive to different levels of health states. In those who choose the risky medical treatment under the same health states, the Canadian participants are willing to accept a lower success probability. Among the socio-economic factors that are significant to this health-related decision, some factors are only significant in one country’s participants. For the American sample, it is “access to health insurance”, while for the Canadian sample, it is “disturbances in everyday family life”.