• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

亚洲人群的健康偏好是否存在差异?来自 11 项亚洲研究的 EQ-5D-5L 离散选择实验数据的比较。

Do health preferences differ among Asian populations? A comparison of EQ-5D-5L discrete choice experiments data from 11 Asian studies.

机构信息

Health Services Management Department, Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, China.

Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Padjadjaran, Jatinangor, Indonesia.

出版信息

Qual Life Res. 2022 Jul;31(7):2175-2187. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-03075-x. Epub 2022 Feb 18.

DOI:10.1007/s11136-021-03075-x
PMID:35181827
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9188617/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Many countries have established their own EQ-5D value sets proceeding on the basis that health preferences differ among countries/populations. So far, published studies focused on comparing value set using TTO data. This study aims to compare the health preferences among 11 Asian populations using the DCE data collected in their EQ-5D-5L valuation studies.

METHODS

In the EQ-VT protocol, 196 pairs of EQ-5D-5L health states were valued by a general population sample using DCE method for all studies. DCE data were obtained from the study PI. To understand how the health preferences are different/similar with each other, the following analyses were done: (1) the statistical difference between the coefficients; (2) the relative importance of the five EQ-5D dimensions; (3) the relative importance of the response levels.

RESULTS

The number of statistically differed coefficients between two studies ranged from 2 to 16 (mean: 9.3), out of 20 main effects coefficients. For the relative importance, there is not a universal preference pattern that fits all studies, but with some common characteristics, e.g. mobility is considered the most important; the relative importance of levels are approximately 20% for level 2, 30% for level 3, 70% for level 4 for all studies.

DISCUSSION

Following a standardized study protocol, there are still considerable differences in the modeling and relative importance results in the EQ-5D-5L DCE data among 11 Asian studies. These findings advocate the use of local value set for calculating health state utility.

摘要

简介

许多国家都根据各国/人群之间健康偏好的差异,建立了自己的 EQ-5D 价值体系。到目前为止,已发表的研究主要集中在使用 TTO 数据比较价值体系上。本研究旨在使用从 EQ-5D-5L 估值研究中收集的 DCE 数据比较 11 个亚洲人群的健康偏好。

方法

在 EQ-VT 方案中,所有研究均使用 DCE 方法由一般人群样本对 196 对 EQ-5D-5L 健康状况进行了赋值。DCE 数据由研究 PI 提供。为了了解健康偏好彼此之间的差异/相似性,进行了以下分析:(1)系数之间的统计学差异;(2)五个 EQ-5D 维度的相对重要性;(3)反应水平的相对重要性。

结果

在 20 个主要效应系数中,两项研究之间有统计学差异的系数数量从 2 到 16 不等(平均值:9.3)。对于相对重要性,没有一种普遍适用的偏好模式适用于所有研究,但具有一些共同特征,例如,移动性被认为是最重要的;对于所有研究,各水平的相对重要性约为 20%为 2 级,30%为 3 级,70%为 4 级。

讨论

在遵循标准化研究方案的情况下,在 11 项亚洲研究的 EQ-5D-5L DCE 数据中,建模和相对重要性结果仍存在相当大的差异。这些发现主张使用本地价值体系来计算健康状态效用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d1cf/9188617/fdcb197729c4/11136_2021_3075_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d1cf/9188617/b1348e051333/11136_2021_3075_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d1cf/9188617/b57d2e44f89b/11136_2021_3075_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d1cf/9188617/fdcb197729c4/11136_2021_3075_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d1cf/9188617/b1348e051333/11136_2021_3075_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d1cf/9188617/b57d2e44f89b/11136_2021_3075_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d1cf/9188617/fdcb197729c4/11136_2021_3075_Fig3_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Do health preferences differ among Asian populations? A comparison of EQ-5D-5L discrete choice experiments data from 11 Asian studies.亚洲人群的健康偏好是否存在差异?来自 11 项亚洲研究的 EQ-5D-5L 离散选择实验数据的比较。
Qual Life Res. 2022 Jul;31(7):2175-2187. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-03075-x. Epub 2022 Feb 18.
2
A hybrid modelling approach for eliciting health state preferences: the Portuguese EQ-5D-5L value set.一种用于获取健康状态偏好的混合建模方法:葡萄牙 EQ-5D-5L 值集。
Qual Life Res. 2019 Dec;28(12):3163-3175. doi: 10.1007/s11136-019-02226-5. Epub 2019 Jun 14.
3
Utility Values for Health States in Ireland: A Value Set for the EQ-5D-5L.爱尔兰健康状态的实用值:EQ-5D-5L 价值体系。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Nov;36(11):1345-1353. doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0690-x.
4
Comparison of Value Set Based on DCE and/or TTO Data: Scoring for EQ-5D-5L Health States in Japan.基于DCE和/或TTO数据的价值集比较:日本EQ-5D-5L健康状态评分
Value Health. 2016 Jul-Aug;19(5):648-54. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.03.1834. Epub 2016 Apr 26.
5
Valuation of EQ-5D-5L health states: a comparison of seven Asian populations.EQ-5D-5L健康状态的估值:七个亚洲人群的比较。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2019 Aug;19(4):445-451. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2019.1557048. Epub 2018 Dec 13.
6
Methodological similarities and variations among EQ-5D-5L value set studies: a systematic review.方法学相似性和 EQ-5D-5L 值集研究的变化:系统评价。
J Med Econ. 2022 Jan-Dec;25(1):571-582. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2022.2066441.
7
Preparatory study for the revaluation of the EQ-5D tariff: methodology report.EQ-5D 价目表重新评估的预备研究:方法报告。
Health Technol Assess. 2014 Feb;18(12):vii-xxvi, 1-191. doi: 10.3310/hta18120.
8
Test-Retest Reliability of EQ-5D-5L Valuation Techniques: The Composite Time Trade-Off and Discrete Choice Experiments.EQ-5D-5L 估值技术的重测信度:综合时间权衡和离散选择实验。
Value Health. 2018 Oct;21(10):1243-1249. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.02.003. Epub 2018 Mar 26.
9
Valuing Health State: An EQ-5D-5L Value Set for Ethiopians.重视健康状况:埃塞俄比亚人的 EQ-5D-5L 值集。
Value Health Reg Issues. 2020 Sep;22:7-14. doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2019.08.475. Epub 2019 Nov 2.
10
Comparison of Preferences and Data Quality between Discrete Choice Experiments Conducted in Online and Face-to-Face Respondents.在线和面对面受访者进行的离散选择实验中的偏好和数据质量比较。
Med Decis Making. 2023 Aug;43(6):667-679. doi: 10.1177/0272989X231171912. Epub 2023 May 18.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of EQ-5D-Y-3L Utility Scores Using Nine Country-Specific Value Sets in Chinese Adolescents.在中国青少年中使用九种特定国家价值集比较EQ-5D-Y-3L效用评分
Pharmacoeconomics. 2025 Feb;43(2):209-221. doi: 10.1007/s40273-024-01451-2. Epub 2024 Nov 12.
2
Association between physical activity and health-related quality of life among adults in China: the moderating role of age.中国成年人身体活动与健康相关生活质量的关系:年龄的调节作用。
Front Public Health. 2024 Mar 27;12:1334081. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1334081. eCollection 2024.
3
Characteristics of health-state utilities used in cost-effectiveness analyses: a systematic review of published studies in Asia.

本文引用的文献

1
Valuing EQ-5D-Y-3L Health States Using a Discrete Choice Experiment: Do Adult and Adolescent Preferences Differ?使用离散选择实验评估EQ-5D-Y-3L健康状态:成人和青少年的偏好是否不同?
Med Decis Making. 2021 Jul;41(5):584-596. doi: 10.1177/0272989X21999607. Epub 2021 Mar 18.
2
The EQ-5D-5L Valuation Study in Egypt.埃及的EQ-5D-5L评估研究。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2021 May;39(5):549-561. doi: 10.1007/s40273-021-01002-z. Epub 2021 Mar 12.
3
Estimation of an Instrument-Defined Minimally Important Difference in EQ-5D-5L Index Scores Based on Scoring Algorithms Derived Using the EQ-VT Version 2 Valuation Protocols.
用于成本效益分析的健康状态效用值特征:亚洲已发表研究的系统评价。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2023 Jun 20;21(1):59. doi: 10.1186/s12955-023-02131-z.
基于使用 EQ-VT 版本 2 估值协议推导的评分算法,估算 EQ-5D-5L 指数评分的仪器定义最小重要差异。
Value Health. 2020 Jul;23(7):936-944. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.03.003. Epub 2020 May 14.
4
Which multi-attribute utility instruments are recommended for use in cost-utility analysis? A review of national health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines.哪些多属性效用仪器推荐用于成本效用分析?国家卫生技术评估(HTA)指南的回顾。
Eur J Health Econ. 2020 Nov;21(8):1245-1257. doi: 10.1007/s10198-020-01195-8. Epub 2020 Jun 8.
5
An EQ-5D-5L Value Set for Vietnam.越南的 EQ-5D-5L 价值集。
Qual Life Res. 2020 Jul;29(7):1923-1933. doi: 10.1007/s11136-020-02469-7. Epub 2020 Mar 27.
6
Toward a Smaller Design for EQ-5D-5L Valuation Studies.迈向更小设计的 EQ-5D-5L 评估研究。
Value Health. 2019 Nov;22(11):1295-1302. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.06.008. Epub 2019 Aug 26.
7
Valuing Health State: An EQ-5D-5L Value Set for Ethiopians.重视健康状况:埃塞俄比亚人的 EQ-5D-5L 值集。
Value Health Reg Issues. 2020 Sep;22:7-14. doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2019.08.475. Epub 2019 Nov 2.
8
United States Valuation of EQ-5D-5L Health States Using an International Protocol.美国使用国际协议对 EQ-5D-5L 健康状态进行评估。
Value Health. 2019 Aug;22(8):931-941. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.02.009. Epub 2019 May 25.
9
Cultural Values: Can They Explain Differences in Health Utilities between Countries?文化价值观:它们能否解释国家间健康效用的差异?
Med Decis Making. 2019 Jul;39(5):605-616. doi: 10.1177/0272989X19841587. Epub 2019 Jul 1.
10
Valuation of EQ-5D-5L Health States in Poland: the First EQ-VT-Based Study in Central and Eastern Europe.波兰的 EQ-5D-5L 健康状态估值:中欧和东欧的首次基于 EQ-VT 的研究。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2019 Sep;37(9):1165-1176. doi: 10.1007/s40273-019-00811-7.