Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Quality of Life Research
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research 7/2016

10.03.2016

The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Korea

verfasst von: Seon-Ha Kim, Jeonghoon Ahn, Minsu Ock, Sangjin Shin, Jooyeon Park, Nan Luo, Min-Woo Jo

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 7/2016

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to estimate Korean preference weights for EQ-5D-5L based on values elicited from Korean population by applying the EuroQol Valuation Technology (EQ-VT) program and the standard protocol by the EuroQol Group.

Methods

The multistage quota sampling method was used to recruit 1085 subjects from the general population in Korea. Each respondent valuated 10 health states using the composite time trade-off (cTTO) and 7 health states using discrete choice experiment. The EQ-VT program was developed by the EuroQol Group and translated into Korean with the Korean research team. Computer-assisted, face-to-face interviews were conducted. A range of predictive models were explored using cTTO. The most appropriate model was determined after assessing goodness of fit, logical consistency, and parsimony.

Results

Of 3206 contacted, 1085 subjects completed interviews (33.8 %) and 1080 were used for modeling. A model with dummy variables for each level of severity and dimension and a term that picked up whether any dimension in the state was at level 4 or 5 was selected as the best predictive model. All coefficients of the final model were statistically significant and logically consistent. In addition, it was parsimonious. This model had mean absolute error of 0.027, and the absolute error for all 86 health states was below 0.1.

Conclusions

The final model built in this study appears to predict the utilities of the states which were valuated directly. This model could be used to interpolate quality weights for all EQ-5D-5L health states.
Vorheriger Artikel Quality of life in Iranian patients with bipolar disorder: a psychometric study of the Persian Brief Quality of Life in Bipolar Disorder (QoL.BD)
Nächster Artikel The EORTC QLQ-CR29 quality of life questionnaire for colorectal cancer: validation of the Dutch version

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Dolan, P., Gudex, C., Kind, P., & Williams, A. (1996). Valuing health states: A comparison of methods. Journal of Health Economics, 15(2), 209–231.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Torrance, G. W. (1986). Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. Journal of Health Economics, 5(1), 1–30.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Torrance, G. W., Feeny, D. H., Furlong, W. J., Barr, R. D., Zhang, Y., & Wang, Q. (1996). Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system. Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Medical Care, 34(7), 702–722.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Feeny, D., Furlong, W., Torrance, G. W., Goldsmith, C. H., Zhu, Z., DePauw, S., et al. (2002). Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Medical Care, 40(2), 113–128.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Brazier, J., Roberts, J., & Deverill, M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics, 21(2), 271–292.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Norman, R., Cronin, P., Viney, R., King, M., Street, D., & Ratcliffe, J. (2009). International comparisons in valuing EQ-5D health states: A review and analysis. Value in Health, 12(8), 1194–1200.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Jo, M. W., Yun, S. C., & Lee, S. I. (2008). Estimating quality weights for EQ-5D health states with the time trade-off method in South Korea. Value in Health, 11(7), 1186–1189.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Lee, Y. K., Nam, H. S., Chuang, L. H., Kim, K. Y., Yang, H. K., Kwon, I. S., et al. (2009). South Korean time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states: Modeling with observed values for 101 health states. Value in Health, 12(8), 1187–1193.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., et al. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research, 20(10), 1727–1736.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Kim, S. H., Kim, H. J., Lee, S. I., & Jo, M. W. (2012). Comparing the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in cancer patients in Korea. Quality of Life Research, 21(6), 1065–1073.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Pickard, A. S., DeLeon, M. C., Kohlmann, T., Cella, D., & Rosenbloom, S. (2007). Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Medical Care, 45(3), 259–263.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Janssen, M. F., Birnie, E., Haagsma, J. A., & Bonsel, G. J. (2008). Comparing the standard EQ-5D three-level system with a five-level version. Value in Health, 11(2), 275–284.CrossRefPubMed
13.
14.
Oppe, M., Devlin, N. J., van Hout, B., Krabbe, P. F., & de Charro, F. (2014). A programme of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value in Health, 17(4), 445–453.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Devlin, N. J., Tsuchiya, A., Buckingham, K., & Tilling, C. (2011). A uniform Time Trade Off method for states better and worse than dead: Feasibility study of the ‘lead time’ approach. Health Economics, 20(3), 348–361.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Ramos-Goni, J. M., Pinto-Prades, J. L., Oppe, M., Cabases, J. M., Serrano-Aguilar, P., & Rivero-Arias, O. (2014). Valuation and modeling of EQ-5D-5L health states using a hybrid approach. Medical Care. doi:10.​1097/​MLR.​0000000000000283​.
17.
Badia, X., Roset, M., & Herdman, M. (1999). Inconsistent responses in three preference-elicitation methods for health states. Social Science and Medicine, 49(7), 943–950.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Tsuchiya, A., Ikeda, S., Ikegami, N., Nishimura, S., Sakai, I., Fukuda, T., et al. (2002). Estimating an EQ-5D population value set: The case of Japan. Health Economics, 11(4), 341–353.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Dolan, P. (1997). Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Medical Care, 35(11), 1095–1108.CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
Dolan, P., Gudex, C., Kind, P., & Williams, A. (1996). The time trade-off method: Results from a general population study. Health Economics, 5(2), 141–154.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Kind, P., Brooks, R., & Rabin, R. (Eds.). (2005). EQ-5D concepts and method. Dordrecht: Springer.
23.
Norman, R., Cronin, P., & Viney, R. (2013). A pilot discrete choice experiment to explore preferences for EQ-5D-5L health states. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 11(3), 287–298.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Walters, S. J., & Brazier, J. E. (2005). Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Quality of Life Research, 14(6), 1523–1532.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Shaw, J. W., Johnson, J. A., & Coons, S. J. (2005). US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: Development and testing of the D1 valuation model. Medical Care, 43(3), 203–220.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Korea
verfasst von
Seon-Ha Kim
Jeonghoon Ahn
Minsu Ock
Sangjin Shin
Jooyeon Park
Nan Luo
Min-Woo Jo
Publikationsdatum
10.03.2016
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 7/2016
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1205-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2016

Quality of Life Research 7/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Brief Communication

Known-groups validity of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) in adolescents and young adults with special healthcare needs

OriginalPaper

The PROMIS FatigueFM Profile: a self-report measure of fatigue for use in fibromyalgia

OriginalPaper

Health-related quality of life questionnaire for polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOSQ-50): development and psychometric properties

OriginalPaper

Determinants of time trade-off valuations for EQ-5D-5L health states: data from the Canadian EQ-5D-5L valuation study

OriginalPaper

The association between social network factors and mental health at different life stages

Brief Communication

The EORTC QLQ-CR29 quality of life questionnaire for colorectal cancer: validation of the Dutch version