IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v40y2020i4p483-497.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Both Time Tradeoff and Discrete Choice Experiments in Valuing the EQ-5D: Impact of Model Misspecification on Value Sets

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Waudby-Smith

    (Department of Statistics & Data Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA)

  • A. Simon Pickard

    (College of Pharmacy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA)

  • Feng Xie

    (Department of Health, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada)

  • Eleanor M. Pullenayegum

    (Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada
    Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada)

Abstract

Introduction. The EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol contains both time tradeoff (TTO) tasks and discrete choice experiments (DCE), raising the question of how to best use these in creating a value set. The hybrid model, which combines TTO and DCE data, has emerged as a commonly used approach. However, this model assumes independence among responses from the same individual, a linear relationship between TTO and DCE utilities, and, in many implementations, homoscedastic residuals. The aims of this study are to examine alternatives to these assumptions and determine the impact of misspecification on value sets. Methods. We performed a simulation study, parameterized using the US EQ-5D-5L valuation study, to assess the impact of model misspecification. We simulated TTO and DCE data with nonlinear relationships between TTO and DCE utilities, heteroscedastic errors, and correlated responses. Simulated data were analyzed using hybrid models with and without heteroscedasticity, Tobit models with and without heteroscedasticity, a latent class model, and a mixed model. Results. Mean absolute errors (MAEs) for correctly specified models were 0.1. When a linear relationship between TTO and DCE utilities held, using both TTO and DCE data under correct specification yielded smaller MAEs compared with using TTO data alone but yielded larger MAEs when a linear relationship did not hold. Mistakenly assuming homoscedasticity led to increased MAEs, whereas ignoring dependence did not. Conclusions. Because heteroscedasticity in TTO utilities and nonlinear associations between DCE and TTO utilities have been noted, we recommend careful assessment of scedasticity and linearity to ascertain the suitability of a hybrid model.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Waudby-Smith & A. Simon Pickard & Feng Xie & Eleanor M. Pullenayegum, 2020. "Using Both Time Tradeoff and Discrete Choice Experiments in Valuing the EQ-5D: Impact of Model Misspecification on Value Sets," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 40(4), pages 483-497, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:40:y:2020:i:4:p:483-497
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X20924019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X20924019
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X20924019?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. Flynn, Terry Nicholas & Louviere, Jordan J. & Peters, Tim J. & Coast, Joanna, 2010. "Using discrete choice experiments to understand preferences for quality of life. Variance-scale heterogeneity matters," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 1957-1965, June.
    2. Amemiya, Takeshi, 1973. "Regression Analysis when the Dependent Variable is Truncated Normal," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(6), pages 997-1016, November.
    3. Eliza L. Y. Wong & Juan Manuel Ramos-Goñi & Annie W. L. Cheung & Amy Y. K. Wong & Oliver Rivero-Arias, 2018. "Assessing the Use of a Feedback Module to Model EQ-5D-5L Health States Values in Hong Kong," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(2), pages 235-247, April.
    4. Feng Xie & Eleanor Pullenayegum & A. Simon Pickard & Juan Manuel Ramos Goñi & Min‐woo Jo & Ataru Igarashi, 2017. "Transforming Latent Utilities to Health Utilities: East Does Not Meet West," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(12), pages 1524-1533, December.
    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. Sofie Balcaen & Sophie Manigart & Hubert Ooghe, 2011. "From distress to exit: determinants of the time to exit," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 407-446, August.
    2. Klos, Alexander & Rottke, Simon, 2013. "Saving and Consumption When Children Move Out," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79786, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    3. Cox, Thomas L. & Briggs, Hugh, 1989. "Heteroscedastic Tobit Models: The Household Demand for Fresh Potatoes Revisited," Staff Papers 200482, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    4. Golob, Thomas F. & Van Wissen, Leo, 1989. "A Joint Household Travel Distance Generation And Car Ownership Model," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt72h4k912, University of California Transportation Center.
    5. K. -L. Wang & Y. -T. Tseng & C. -C. Weng, 2003. "A study of production efficiencies of integrated securities firms in Taiwan," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 159-167.
    6. Rama Lionel Ngenzebuke, 2016. "Female say on income and child outcomes: Evidence from Nigeria," WIDER Working Paper Series 134, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    7. Baidu-Forson, J., 1999. "Factors influencing adoption of land-enhancing technology in the Sahel: lessons from a case study in Niger," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 231-239, May.
    8. V A Hajivassiliou & Frédérique Savignac & Frédérique Savignac, 2019. "Novel Approaches to Coherency Conditions in Dynamic LDV Models: Quantifying Financing Constraints and a Firm's Decision and Ability to Innovate," STICERD - Econometrics Paper Series 606, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    9. Zhang, Feipeng & Xu, Yixiong & Fan, Caiyun, 2023. "Nonparametric inference of expectile-based value-at-risk for financial time series with application to risk assessment," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    10. Eliza Lai Yi Wong & Richard Huan Xu & Annie Wai Ling Cheung, 2020. "Health-related quality of life in elderly people with hypertension and the estimation of minimally important difference using EQ-5D-5L in Hong Kong SAR, China," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(6), pages 869-879, August.
    11. Mario D. Tello, 2020. "Political Economy Approach of Trade Barriers: The Case of Peruvian’s Trade Liberalization," Documentos de Trabajo / Working Papers 2020-486, Departamento de Economía - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.
    12. Kim, Kwansoo & Chavas, Jean-Paul, 2002. "A Dynamic Analysis Of The Effects Of A Price Support Program On Price Dynamics And Price Volatility," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Terry N. Flynn & Elisabeth Huynh & Tim J. Peters & Hareth Al‐Janabi & Sam Clemens & Alison Moody & Joanna Coast, 2015. "Scoring the Icecap‐a Capability Instrument. Estimation of a UK General Population Tariff," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 258-269, March.
    14. Charlier, Dorothée, 2015. "Energy efficiency investments in the context of split incentives among French households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 465-479.
    15. Xiu, Dacheng, 2010. "Quasi-maximum likelihood estimation of volatility with high frequency data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 159(1), pages 235-250, November.
    16. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    17. Adrian C. Darnell, 1994. "A Dictionary Of Econometrics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 118.
    18. Georg Stadtmann & Dirk Czarnitzki, 2002. "Uncertainty of outcome versus reputation: Empirical evidence for the First German Football Division," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 101-112.
    19. Craig E. Landry & Mohammad R. Jahan‐Parvar, 2011. "Flood Insurance Coverage in the Coastal Zone," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 78(2), pages 361-388, June.
    20. Hubner, Georges, 2001. "The analytic pricing of asymmetric defaultable swaps," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 295-316, February.

    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:40:y:2020:i:4:p:483-497. 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.