Suppr超能文献

国家间 EQ-5D-3L 评分算法的异质性:健康状态选择的差异有多大?

Between-country heterogeneity in EQ-5D-3L scoring algorithms: how much is due to differences in health state selection?

机构信息

Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

出版信息

Eur J Health Econ. 2015 Nov;16(8):847-55. doi: 10.1007/s10198-014-0633-1. Epub 2014 Sep 25.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

EQ-5D-3L scoring algorithms vary amongst countries, not only in the values of regression coefficients but also in the independent variables included in the regression model (hereafter referred to as model specification). It is unclear how much of this variation is due to differences in health state selection, the relative frequencies with which health states were valued, and model diagnostics, rather than to genuine differences in population preferences.

METHODS

Using aggregate data from a recent review, we noted all model specifications that were used. For each country the country's own model was re-fitted, as were all other model specifications. This was done twice: once using all valued health states for each country, and again using a common set of 17 health states for all countries. Goodness of fit was assessed using the following model diagnostics: mean absolute error (MAE), mean squared error (MSE) and rho (the Pearson correlation coefficient between predicted and observed mean utilities), both with and without leave-one-out cross-validation.

RESULTS

Thirteen countries contributed data. Even when using a common set of health states, the preferred model varied across countries. However, choice of health states did impact the preferred model specification: when using cross-validation, the preferred specification changed in five of ten countries when moving from 17 health states to all valued health states. The relative frequency with which health states were valued had little impact on the preferred model.

CONCLUSIONS

Variation in choices of health states to value is responsible for some, but not all, of the observed heterogeneity in model specification. Relative frequency of health state valuation and choice of model diagnostic has a limited impact on model preference, however, use of cross-validation has a substantial impact. The use of cross-validation, implemented through omitting health states rather than respondents, is recommended as one approach to assessing model fit.

摘要

背景

EQ-5D-3L 评分算法在不同国家之间存在差异,不仅表现在回归系数的数值上,还表现在回归模型中包含的自变量(以下简称模型规格)上。目前尚不清楚这种差异有多大程度是由于健康状态选择、健康状态赋值的相对频率以及模型诊断的差异造成的,而不是由于人群偏好的真正差异造成的。

方法

利用最近一项综述的汇总数据,我们注意到了所有使用的模型规格。对于每个国家,我们重新拟合了本国的模型,以及所有其他的模型规格。这是分两步进行的:一次是使用每个国家的所有赋值健康状态,另一次是使用所有国家共同的 17 个健康状态。使用以下模型诊断来评估拟合优度:平均绝对误差(MAE)、平均平方误差(MSE)和 rho(预测和观察到的平均效用之间的 Pearson 相关系数),包括和不包括留一交叉验证。

结果

有 13 个国家提供了数据。即使使用共同的健康状态集,不同国家也偏好不同的模型规格。然而,健康状态的选择确实影响了首选的模型规格:当使用交叉验证时,当从 17 个健康状态移动到所有赋值的健康状态时,十个国家中有五个国家的首选规格发生了变化。健康状态赋值的相对频率对首选模型的影响不大。

结论

对要赋值的健康状态的选择的变化是造成模型规格观察到的异质性的部分原因,但不是全部原因。健康状态赋值的相对频率和模型诊断的选择对模型偏好的影响有限,然而,交叉验证的使用有很大的影响。建议使用交叉验证作为评估模型拟合度的一种方法,通过省略健康状态而不是受访者来实现。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验