EuroQol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Psychiatry, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Value Health. 2024 Sep;27(9):1280-1288. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2024.05.016. Epub 2024 Jun 4.
Discrete choice experiments including a duration attribute (DCEd) represent a promising candidate method for valuing health-related quality-of-life instruments. However, it has not been established that DCEd can produce similar results as composite time trade-off (cTTO) or EuroQol Valuation Technology (EQ-VT) valuations of the EQ-5D-5L instrument. This study provides a direct comparison between cTTO and EQ-VT, and DCEd valuation methods.
An EQ-VT study was conducted in Trinidad and Tobago to value the EQ-5D-5L. 1079 respondents each completed 10 cTTO tasks and 12 discrete choice experiments tasks without a duration attribute. A separate sample of 970 respondents each completed 18 split-triplet DCEd tasks. Several regression models were applied to the EQ-VT data, and the DCEd data were analyzed using mixed logit models with an exponential discount rate. The estimated values were compared using scatterplots and Bland-Altman plots.
The ordering of dimensions was identical in level 5 for cTTO/EQ-VT and DCEd models, with pain/discomfort being the most important dimension and usual activities being least important. cTTO/EQ-VT models produced a value for state 55555 ranging between -0.52 and -0.69, whereas this was -0.543 for the nonlinear mixed logit model for the DCEd data. Scatterplots and Bland-Altman plots suggested excellent agreement between cTTO/EQ-VT and DCEd-based estimates.
CTTO/EQ-VT and DCEd valuations produce similar results when correcting DCEd for nonlinear time preferences. The ordering of importance of the dimensions and scale are identical, suggesting that the 2 methods measure the same construct and produce similar results.
包含持续时间属性的离散选择实验(DCEd)代表了一种有前途的健康相关生活质量工具的评估方法。然而,尚未确定 DCEd 能否产生与复合时间权衡(cTTO)或 EuroQol 估值技术(EQ-VT)对 EQ-5D-5L 工具的评估相同的结果。本研究直接比较了 cTTO 和 EQ-VT 以及 DCEd 估值方法。
在特立尼达和多巴哥进行了一项 EQ-VT 研究,以评估 EQ-5D-5L。1079 名受访者每人完成了 10 项 cTTO 任务和 12 项没有持续时间属性的离散选择实验任务。另一组 970 名受访者每人完成了 18 项分割三重 DCEd 任务。对 EQ-VT 数据应用了几种回归模型,并使用具有指数折扣率的混合对数模型分析了 DCEd 数据。通过散点图和 Bland-Altman 图比较了估计值。
cTTO/EQ-VT 和 DCEd 模型在 5 级水平上的维度排序相同,疼痛/不适是最重要的维度,而日常活动是最不重要的维度。cTTO/EQ-VT 模型得出状态 55555 的值在-0.52 到-0.69 之间,而非线性混合对数模型得出的 DCEd 数据的值为-0.543。散点图和 Bland-Altman 图表明 cTTO/EQ-VT 和基于 DCEd 的估计值之间具有极好的一致性。
在纠正 DCEd 的非线性时间偏好后,cTTO/EQ-VT 和 DCEd 估值产生相似的结果。重要性维度和量表的排序相同,这表明这两种方法测量的是相同的结构并产生相似的结果。