Nord E, Richardson J, Macarounas-Kirchmann K
Norwegian National Institute of Public Health.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1993 Fall;9(4):463-78. doi: 10.1017/s0266462300005390.
In most of the cost-utility literature, quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gains are interpreted as a measure of social value. Given this interpretation, the validity of different multi-attribute health-state scaling instruments may be tested by comparing the values they provide on the 0-1 QALY scale with directly elicited preferences for person trade-offs between different treatments (equivalence of numbers of different patients treated). Norwegian and Australian public preferences as measured by the person trade-off suggest that the EuroQol Instrument assigns excessively low values to health states. This seems to be even more true of the McMaster Health Classification System. The Quality of Well-being Scale appears to compress states toward the middle of the 0-1 scale. By contrast, the Rosser/Kind index fits reasonably well with directly measured person trade-off data.
在大多数成本效用文献中，质量调整生命年（QALY）的增加被视为社会价值的一种衡量标准。基于这种解释，可以通过比较不同多属性健康状态量表在0至1 QALY量表上提供的值与直接引出的不同治疗之间个人权衡偏好（不同治疗患者数量的等效性），来检验不同多属性健康状态量表的有效性。通过个人权衡测量的挪威和澳大利亚公众偏好表明，欧洲五维度健康量表（EuroQol）对健康状态赋予的值过低。麦克马斯特健康分类系统似乎更是如此。幸福感量表似乎将状态压缩到0至1量表的中间。相比之下，罗瑟/金氏指数（Rosser/Kind index）与直接测量的个人权衡数据相当吻合。
