|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Estimating the Association between SF-12 Responses and EQ-5D Utility Values by Response Mapping
Alastair M. Gray, PhD
Health Economics Research Centre, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK; alastair.gray{at}dphpc.ox.ac.uk
Oliver Rivero-Arias, MSc
Philip M. Clarke, PhD
Health Economics Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Background. Reliably mapping from generic or diseasespecific health status measures into health state utilities would assist health economists. Existing studies mainly use ordinary least squares (OLS) regression equations to predict utility values for particular health states. The authors examine an alternative approach tomap between 2 generic health status instruments, the SF-12 and the EQ-5D. Methods. Multinomial logit regression is used to estimate the probability that a respondent will select a particular level of response to questions in the EQ-5D, using individual question responses and summary scores from the SF-12 as predictors. Monte Carlo simulation methods are used to generate predicted EQ-5D responses, and utility scores (tariffs) are then attached. Results are comparedwithanalternativeapproach based on direct mapping to utility scores using OLS. Data. The authors estimate equations using 12,967 adult survey responses-from the 2000 US Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. They report mean squared error (MSE) andmean absolute error (MAE) of their predicted utilitieswithin this sample, and out-of-sample using 13,304 adults from the 1996 Health Survey for England. Results. The authors obtain an in-sample and out-of-sample MSE of 0.03, compared with 0.02 for the OLS approach. Their MAE of 0.11 is similar to OLS results. The authors’ method predicts groupmean utility scores and differentiates between groups with or without known existing illness. Conclusions. The authors’ approach has higher MSE than the direct OLS approach but givesmore descriptive data on domains of health effects. Further outofsample prediction work will help test the validity of these methods.
Key Words: health status • SF-12 • SF-36 EQ-5D • utility values
References
- Lundberg L, Johannesson M, Isacson DG, Borgquist L. The relationship between health-state utilities and the SF-12 in a general population. Med Decis Making. 1999;19(2):128–140.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Shmueli A. Subjective health status and health values in the general population. Med Decis Making. 1999;19(2):122–127.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preferencebased measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ. 2002;21(2): 271–292.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Fryback DG, Lawrence WF, Martin PA, Klein R, Klein BE. Predicting quality of well-being scores from the SF-36: results from the Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study. Med Decis Making. 1997;17(1): 1–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- O'Brien BJ, Spath M, Blackhouse G, Severens JL, Dorian P, Brazier J. A view fromthe bridge: agreement between the SF-6D utility algorithm and the Health Utilities Index. Health Econ. 2003; 12(11):975–981.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Franks P, Lubetkin EI, Gold MR, Tancredi DJ. Mapping the SF-12 to preference-based instruments: convergent validity in a lowincome, minority population. Med Care. 2003;41(11):1277–1283.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Franks P, Lubetkin EI, Gold MR, Tancredi DJ, Jia H. Mapping the SF-12 to the EuroQol EQ-5D Index in a national US sample. Med Decis Making. 2004;24(3):247–254.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Long JS. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. London: Sage; 1997.
- EuroQol Group. EuroQol—a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16:199–208.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ. 1996; 5(2):141–154.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Zavoina R, McElvey W. A statistical model for the analysis of ordinal level dependent variables. J Math Soc. 1975;Summer:103–120.
- Nerlove M, Press S. Univariate and Multivariate Log-Linear and Logistic Models (RAND-R1306-EDA/NIH). Santa Monica (CA): RAND; 1973.
- Greene WH. Econometric Analysis. 4th ed. London: Prentice Hall; 1997.
- Long JS. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 1997.
- Health Survey. Health Survey for England 1996. London: The Stationery Office; 1998.
- Ware-JE J, Kosinski M, Turner-Bowker D, Gandek B. How to ScoreVersion 2 of the SF-12 Health Survey. Lincoln (RI): QualityMetric; 2002.
Medical Decision Making, Vol. 26, No. 1,
18-29 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X05284108
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
H. Jia and E. I. Lubetkin
Estimating EuroQol EQ-5D Scores from Population Healthy Days Data
Med Decis Making,
July 1, 2008;
28(4):
491 - 499.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Mortimer and L. Segal
Comparing the Incomparable? A Systematic Review of Competing Techniques for Converting Descriptive Measures of Health Status into QALY-Weights
Med Decis Making,
January 1, 2008;
28(1):
66 - 89.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Helfand and L. Saxton
Medical Decision Making and Electronic Publishing
Med Decis Making,
March 1, 2007;
27(2):
98 - 100.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
