LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Rowen, D.; Brazier, J.E.; Young, T.A.; Gaugrist, S.; Craig, B.M.; King, M.T.; Velikova, G.
Publisher: Elsevier
Journal: Value in Health
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Health Policy, Article, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Classified by OpenAIRE into

mesheuropmc: humanities, social sciences
Background: The EORTC QLQ-C30 is one of the most commonly used measures in cancer but in its current form cannot be used in economic evaluation as it does not incorporate preferences.\ud \ud Methods and results: We address this gap by estimating a preference-based single index for cancer from the EORTC QLQ-C30 for use in economic evaluation. Factor analysis, Rasch analysis and other psychometric analyses were undertaken on a clinical trial dataset of 655 patients with multiple myeloma to derive a health state classification from the QLQ-C30 that is amenable to valuation. The resulting health state classification system has 8 dimensions (physical functioning, role functioning, social functioning, emotional functioning, pain, fatigue and sleep disturbance, nausea, and constipation and diarrhoea) with 4 or 5 levels each. A valuation study was conducted of 350 members of the UK general population using ranking and time trade-off. Mean and individual level additive multivariate regression models including the episodic random utility model were fitted to the valuation data to derive preference weights for the classification system. Mean absolute error ranges from 0.046 to 0.054 and models have few inconsistencies (0 to 2) in estimated preference weights.\ud \ud Conclusions: We conclude that it is feasible to derive a preference-based measure from the EORTC QLQ-C30 for use in economic evaluation, but this work needs to be extended to other countries and replicated across other patient groups.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1993 Mar 3; 85(5):365-76. [PubMed: 8433390]
    • Brazier JE, Dixon S. The use of condition specific outcome measures in economic appraisal. Health Economics. 1995; 4:255-264. [PubMed: 8528428]
    • Brazier JE, Harper R, Thomas K, Jones N, Underwood T. Deriving a preference based single index measure from the SF-36. J Clinical Epidemiology. 1998; 51 (11):1115-1129.
    • Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation a preference-based single index measure for health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics. 2002; 21(2):271-292. [PubMed: 11939242]
    • Brazier J, Roberts J. The estimation of a preference-based index from the SF-12. Medical Care. 2004; 42:851-859. [PubMed: 15319610]
    • Brazier, JE.; Ratcliffe, J.; Tsuchiya, A.; Solomon, J. Measuring and valuing health for economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.
    • Brazier JE, Czoski-Murray C, Roberts J, Brown M, Symonds T, Kelleher C. Estimation of a preference-based index from a condition specific measure: the King's Health Questionnaire. Medical Decision Making. 2008; 28(1):113-126. [PubMed: 17641139]
    • Brazier J, Yang Y, Tsuchiya A, Rowen D. A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) from nonpreference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. European Journal of Health Economics. 2009 Forthcoming.
    • Chatfield, C.; Collins, AJ. Introduction to Multivariate Analysis. Chapman and Hall; 1980.
    • Cohen, J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. New York: Academic Press; 1978.
    • Craig BM, Busschbach JJV. The Episodic Random Utility Model Unifies Worse Than Death and Better Than Death TTO Responses in Health State Valuation. Population Health Metrics. 2009; 7(3):1-10. [PubMed: 19126218]
    • Dolan P. Modelling valuations for EuroQol Health States. Medical Care. 1997; 35 (11):1095-1108. [PubMed: 9366889]
    • Drummond, M. Economic Evaluation Alongside Clinical Trials. Department of Health; London: 1994.
    • Drummond, MF.; O'Brien, BJ.; Stoddart, GL.; Torrance, GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications; 1997.
    • Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW, Goldsmith CH, Zhu Z, DePauw S, Denton M, Boyle M. Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 system. Medical Care. 2002; 40 (2):113-128. [PubMed: 11802084]
    • Garau M, Shah K, Towse A, Wang Q, Drummond M, Mason A. Assessment and appraisal of oncology medicines: does NICE's approach include all relevant elements? What can be learnt from international HTA experiences? Report for the Pharmaceutical Oncology Initiative (POI). 2009 Feb.
    • Kind, P.; Hardman, G.; Macran, S. UK Population Norms for EQ-5D. University of York; 1999. Centre for Health Economics Discussion Paper Series
    • il-ttIrereauqn ..t1o30009 ..t0o39320 ..t0o08950 ..to630700− ..t0o88830 ..t0o54920 ..t0o63960 ..t0o33820 ..t1o30040 ..to034590 ..to315000 ..to804880 ..to802370 ..to804390 ..to105980 ..to303690 ..to503830 ..to600790 ..to118000 ..to120690 ..to040730 ..to460980 ..to240940 ..to620780 ..to340930 ..to830010 ..to055900 ..t320o05− 0
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article