IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v31y2011i1p174-185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting the EuroQol Group’s EQ-5D Index from CDC’s “Healthy Days†in a US Sample

Author

Listed:
  • Haomiao Jia
  • Matthew M. Zack
  • David G. Moriarty
  • Dennis G. Fryback

Abstract

Background . Obtaining reliable preference-based scores from the widely used Healthy Days measures would enable calculation of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost-utility analyses in many US community populations and over time. Previous studies translating the Healthy Days to the EQ-5D, a preference-based measure, relied on an indirect method because of a lack of population-based survey data that asked both sets of questions of the same respondents. Method . Data from the 2005–2006 National Health Measurement Study (NHMS; n = 3844 adults 35 years old or older) were used to develop regression-based models to estimate EQ-5D index scores from self-reported age, self-rated general health, and numbers of unhealthy days. Results . The models explained up to 52% of the variance in the EQ-5D. Estimated EQ-5D scores matched well to the observed EQ-5D scores in mean scores overall and by age, gender, race/ethnicity, income, education, body mass index, smoking, and disease categories. The average absolute differences were 0.005 to 0.006 on a health utility scale. After estimating mean EQ-5D index scores overall and for various subgroups in a large representative US sample of Healthy Days respondents, the authors found that these mean scores also closely matched the corresponding mean scores of EQ-5D respondents obtained from another large US representative sample with an average absolute difference of 0.013 points. Conclusions . This study yielded a mapping algorithm to estimate EQ-5D index scores from the Healthy Days measures for populations of adults 35 years old and older. Such analysis confirms it is feasible to estimate mean EQ-5D index scores with acceptable validity for use in calculating QALYs and cost-utility analyses based on the overall model fit and relatively small differences between the observed and the estimated mean scores.

Suggested Citation

  • Haomiao Jia & Matthew M. Zack & David G. Moriarty & Dennis G. Fryback, 2011. "Predicting the EuroQol Group’s EQ-5D Index from CDC’s “Healthy Days†in a US Sample," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(1), pages 174-185, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:31:y:2011:i:1:p:174-185
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X10364845
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X10364845
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X10364845?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marianne P. Bitler & Jonah B. Gelbach & Hilary W. Hoynes, 2006. "What Mean Impacts Miss: Distributional Effects of Welfare Reform Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 988-1012, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna & Xiaojun Song & Qi Xu, 2022. "Covariate distribution balance via propensity scores," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(6), pages 1093-1120, September.
    2. Undral Byambadalai & Tatsushi Oka & Shota Yasui, 2024. "Estimating Distributional Treatment Effects in Randomized Experiments: Machine Learning for Variance Reduction," Papers 2407.16037, arXiv.org.
    3. Maier, Michael, 2011. "Tests for distributional treatment effects under unconfoundedness," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 49-51, January.
    4. Firpo, Sergio & Galvao, Antonio F. & Kobus, Martyna & Parker, Thomas & Rosa-Dias, Pedro, 2020. "Loss Aversion and the Welfare Ranking of Policy Interventions," IZA Discussion Papers 13176, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Sloczynski, Tymon, 2018. "A General Weighted Average Representation of the Ordinary and Two-Stage Least Squares Estimands," IZA Discussion Papers 11866, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Abdullah Kumas & Daniel L. Millimet, 2018. "Reassessing the effects of bilateral tax treaties on US FDI activity," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 42(3), pages 451-470, July.
    7. Cairo, Sofie & Mahlstedt, Robert, 2023. "The disparate effects of information provision: A field experiment on the work incentives of social welfare," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    8. Balestra, Simone & Backes-Gellner, Uschi, 2017. "Heterogeneous returns to education over the wage distribution: Who profits the most?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 89-105.
    9. Shunyuan Zhang & Nitin Mehta & Param Vir Singh & Kannan Srinivasan, 2021. "Frontiers: Can an Artificial Intelligence Algorithm Mitigate Racial Economic Inequality? An Analysis in the Context of Airbnb," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(5), pages 813-820, September.
    10. Carlos Lamarche, 2013. "Industry-wide work rules and productivity: evidence from Argentine union contract data," IZA Journal of Labor & Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 2(1), pages 1-25, December.
    11. Zaresani, Arezou & Olivo-Villabrille, Miguel, 2022. "Return-to-work policies’ clawback regime and labor supply in disability insurance programs," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    12. Dipanwita Sarkar & Michael Kidd, 2016. "The impact of endogenous occupational attainment on native-migrant wage distributions," QuBE Working Papers 042, QUT Business School.
    13. Altmann, Steffen & Falk, Armin & Jäger, Simon & Zimmermann, Florian, 2018. "Learning about job search: A field experiment with job seekers in Germany," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 33-49.
    14. G�nther Fink & Margaret McConnell & Sebastian Vollmer, 2014. "Testing for heterogeneous treatment effects in experimental data: false discovery risks and correction procedures," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 44-57, January.
    15. Kock, Anders Bredahl & Preinerstorfer, David & Veliyev, Bezirgen, 2023. "Treatment recommendation with distributional targets," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 624-646.
    16. Per Fredriksson & Daniel Millimet, 2007. "Legislative Organization and Pollution Taxation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 217-242, April.
    17. Cummins, Joseph R., 2017. "Heterogeneous treatment effects in the low track: Revisiting the Kenyan primary school experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 40-51.
    18. Neng-Chieh Chang, 2020. "The Mode Treatment Effect," Papers 2007.11606, arXiv.org.
    19. Tal Gross & Jeanne Lafortune & Corinne Low, 2014. "What Happens the Morning After? The Costs and Benefits of Expanding Access to Emergency Contraception," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(1), pages 70-93, January.
    20. Katherine Caves & Simone Balestra, 2018. "The impact of high school exit exams on graduation rates and achievement," The Journal of Educational Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(2), pages 186-200, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:31:y:2011:i:1:p:174-185. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.