SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Decision Analysis and Support Unit, Warsaw, Poland.
Med Decis Making. 2023 Oct-Nov;43(7-8):875-885. doi: 10.1177/0272989X231201147. Epub 2023 Oct 16.
In valuation studies of the EQ-5D-5L instrument, the composite time tradeoff method (cTTO) is often used to elicit preferences. In cTTO, some health states are considered worse than dead (WTD) and are assigned negative utility values. However, these negative values correlate poorly with state severity, which suggests that cTTO is insufficiently sensitive. A recent threshold explanation has been offered to account for the lack of correlation: because the severity threshold beyond which a state is considered WTD differs between respondents, the correlation should be studied for individual respondents clustered by the number of WTD states. The results obtained in such a threshold approach were interpreted to disprove the insensitivity of the cTTO method.
To scrutinize the threshold explanation and test whether it indeed refutes the insensitivity of cTTO.
The study uses data from the EQ-5D-5L Polish valuation study, which includes cTTO responses from 1,510 participants, each of whom evaluated 10 EQ-5D-5L states. The correlation analysis and threshold approach are repeated to confirm the results from previous studies. The data are then modified in 2 contrasting ways. First, negative utilities are randomly reshuffled to test whether the threshold approach can capture cTTO insensitivity. Second, individual-level regressions are used to simulate negative values to ensure they correlate with severity at the individual respondent level, verifying whether the overall severity-utility correlation should be observed.
First, reshuffling negative utilities does not change the results of the threshold approach. Hence, the threshold explanation fails to prove cTTO sensitivity. Second, when sensitivity was introduced on an individual level, a significant overall correlation between severity and negative utility arose.
cTTO is insensitive to severity for WTD states.
For the composite time tradeoff method, the utility values of health states worse than dead correlate poorly with state severity, which suggests that cTTO has insufficient sensitivity.Recently, a so-called threshold explanation was offered for the lack of correlation.I show why the threshold explanation fails and why the composite time tradeoff is indeed insensitive for worse-than-dead states.
在 EQ-5D-5L 工具的评估研究中,复合时间权衡法(cTTO)常用于偏好评估。在 cTTO 中,一些健康状态被认为比死亡还差(WTD),并被赋予负效用值。然而,这些负数值与状态严重程度的相关性很差,这表明 cTTO 的敏感性不足。最近提出了一个阈值解释来解释这种缺乏相关性的原因:由于被认为是 WTD 的状态的严重程度阈值因人而异,因此应该针对按 WTD 状态数量聚类的个体受访者来研究相关性。在这种阈值方法中获得的结果被解释为否定了 cTTO 方法的不敏感性。
仔细审查阈值解释,并检验其是否确实否定了 cTTO 的不敏感性。
本研究使用来自 EQ-5D-5L 波兰价值评估研究的数据,其中包括来自 1510 名参与者的 cTTO 反应,每个参与者评估了 10 个 EQ-5D-5L 状态。重复相关性分析和阈值方法以确认以前研究的结果。然后以两种对比的方式修改数据。首先,随机重新排列负效用值,以检验阈值方法是否能捕捉到 cTTO 的不敏感性。其次,使用个体水平回归来模拟负数值,以确保它们在个体受访者层面上与严重程度相关,从而验证是否应该在个体受访者层面上观察到总体严重程度-效用相关性。
首先,重新排列负效用值不会改变阈值方法的结果。因此,阈值解释未能证明 cTTO 的敏感性。其次,当在个体水平上引入敏感性时,严重程度和负效用之间出现了显著的总体相关性。
cTTO 对 WTD 状态的严重程度不敏感。
对于复合时间权衡法,比死亡还差的健康状态的效用值与状态严重程度相关性很差,这表明 cTTO 的敏感性不足。最近,针对缺乏相关性提出了一种所谓的阈值解释。我展示了为什么阈值解释失败,以及为什么复合时间权衡法对比死亡还差的状态确实不敏感。