IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v43y2023i6p692-703.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of EuroQol Valuation Technology (EQ-VT) Designs to Generate National Value Sets: Learnings from the Development of an EQ-5D Value Set for India Using an Extended Design (DEVINE) Study

Author

Listed:
  • Gaurav Jyani

    (Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India)

  • Zhihao Yang

    (Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, People’s Republic of China)

  • Atul Sharma

    (Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India)

  • Aarti Goyal

    (Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India)

  • Elly Stolk

    (EuroQol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, South Holland, the Netherlands)

  • Fredrick Dermawan Purba

    (Department of Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Jawa Barat, Indonesia)

  • Sandeep Grover

    (Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India)

  • Manmeet Kaur

    (Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India)

  • Shankar Prinja

    (Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India)

Abstract

Introduction Countries develop their EQ-5D-5L value sets using the EuroQol Valuation Technology (EQ-VT) protocol. This study aims to assess if extension in the conventional EQ-VT design can lead to development of value sets with improved precision. Methods A cross-sectional survey was undertaken in a representative sample of 3,548 adult respondents, selected from 5 different states of India using a multistage stratified random sampling technique. A novel extended EQ-VT design was created that included 18 blocks of 10 health states, comprising 150 unique health states and 135 observations per health state. In addition to the standard EQ-VT design, which is based on 86 health states and 100 observations per health state, 3 extended designs were assessed for their predictive performance. The extended designs were created by 1) increasing the number of observations per health state in the design, 2) increasing the number of health states in the design, and 3) implementing both 1) and 2) at the same time. Subsamples of the data set were created for separate designs. The root mean squared error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE) were used to measure the predictive accuracy of the conventional and extended designs. Results The average RMSE and MAE for the standard EQ-VT design were 0.055 and 0.041, respectively, for the 150 health states. All 3 types of design extensions showed lower RMSE and MAE values as compared with the standard design and hence yielded better predictive performance. RMSE and MAE were lowest (0.051 and 0.039, respectively) for the designs that use a greater number of health states. Extending the design with inclusion of more health states was shown to improve the predictive performance even when the sample size was fixed at 1,000. Conclusion Although the standard EQ-VT design performs well, its prediction accuracy can be further improved by extending its design. The addition of more health states in EQ-VT is more beneficial than increasing the number of observations per health state. Highlights The EQ-5D-5L value sets are developed using the standardized EuroQol Valuation Technology (EQ-VT) protocol. This is the first study to empirically assess how much can be gained from extending the standard EQ-VT design in terms of sample size and/or health states. It not only presents useful insights into the performance of the standard design of the EQ-VT but also tests the potential extensions in the standard EQ-VT design in terms of increasing the health states to be directly valued as well as the number of observations recorded to predict the utility value of each of these health states. The study demonstrates that the standard EQ-VT design performs good, and an extension in the design of the standard EQ-VT can lead to further improvement in its performance. The addition of more health states in EQ-VT is more beneficial than increasing the number of observations per health state. Extending the design with inclusion of more health states marginally improves the predictive performance even when the sample size was fixed at 1,000. The findings of the study will streamline the systematic process for generating precise EQ-5D-5L value sets, thus facilitating the conduct of credible, transparent, and robust outcome valuation in health technology assessments.

Suggested Citation

  • Gaurav Jyani & Zhihao Yang & Atul Sharma & Aarti Goyal & Elly Stolk & Fredrick Dermawan Purba & Sandeep Grover & Manmeet Kaur & Shankar Prinja, 2023. "Evaluation of EuroQol Valuation Technology (EQ-VT) Designs to Generate National Value Sets: Learnings from the Development of an EQ-5D Value Set for India Using an Extended Design (DEVINE) Study," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(6), pages 692-703, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:43:y:2023:i:6:p:692-703
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X231180134
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X231180134
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X231180134?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. Dolan, Paul & Roberts, Jennifer, 2002. "To what extent can we explain time trade-off values from other information about respondents?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 919-929, March.
    2. Drummond, Michael F. & Sculpher, Mark J. & Claxton, Karl & Stoddart, Greg L. & Torrance, George W., 2015. "Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 4, number 9780199665884.
    3. Elizabeth Goodwin & Kate Boddy & Lynn Tatnell & Annie Hawton, 2018. "Involving Members of the Public in Health Economics Research: Insights from Selecting Health States for Valuation to Estimate Quality-Adjusted Life-Year (QALY) Weights," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 187-194, April.
    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. Stefan A. Lipman & Brigitte A. B. Essers & Aureliano P. Finch & Ayesha Sajjad & Peep F. M. Stalmeier & Bram Roudijk, 2022. "In a Child’s Shoes: Composite Time Trade-Off Valuations for EQ-5D-Y-3L with Different Proxy Perspectives," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 181-192, December.
    2. Rodríguez-Míguez, E. & Abellán-Perpiñán, J.M. & Alvarez, X.C. & González, X.M. & Sampayo, A.R., 2016. "The DEP-6D, a new preference-based measure to assess health states of dependency," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 210-219.
    3. Chiranjeev Sanyal & Don Husereau, 2020. "Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Services Provided by Community Pharmacists," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 375-392, June.
    4. Andrew J. Mirelman & Miqdad Asaria & Bryony Dawkins & Susan Griffin & Richard Cookson & Peter Berman, 2020. "Fairer Decisions, Better Health for All: Health Equity and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Paul Revill & Marc Suhrcke & Rodrigo Moreno-Serra & Mark Sculpher (ed.), Global Health Economics Shaping Health Policy in Low- and Middle-Income Countries, chapter 4, pages 99-132, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Christopher M Doran & Irina Kinchin, 2020. "Economic and epidemiological impact of youth suicide in countries with the highest human development index," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-11, May.
    6. Qi Cao & Erik Buskens & Hans L. Hillege & Tiny Jaarsma & Maarten Postma & Douwe Postmus, 2019. "Stratified treatment recommendation or one-size-fits-all? A health economic insight based on graphical exploration," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(3), pages 475-482, April.
    7. Annie Hawton & Kate Boddy & Rebecca Kandiyali & Lynn Tatnell & Andy Gibson & Elizabeth Goodwin, 2021. "Involving Patients in Health Economics Research: “The PACTS Principles”," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 14(4), pages 429-434, July.
    8. Dongzhe Hong & Lei Si & Minghuan Jiang & Hui Shao & Wai-kit Ming & Yingnan Zhao & Yan Li & Lizheng Shi, 2019. "Cost Effectiveness of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) Inhibitors, Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonists, and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 (DPP-4) Inhibitors: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 777-818, June.
    9. Simon Pol & Paula Rojas Garcia & Fernando Antoñanzas Villar & Maarten J. Postma & Antoinette D. I. Asselt, 2021. "Health-Economic Analyses of Diagnostics: Guidance on Design and Reporting," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(12), pages 1355-1363, December.
    10. Paul Revill & Simon Walker & Valentina Cambiano & Andrew Phillips & Mark J Sculpher, 2018. "Reflecting the real value of health care resources in modelling and cost-effectiveness studies—The example of viral load informed differentiated care," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, January.
    11. Omar B. Da'ar & Abdi A. Gele, 2023. "Tuberculosis in a weak health system, conflict and fragile zone: The monetary value of human lives lost associated with deaths of persons older than 14 years in Somalia," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 53-68, January.
    12. Anna Nicolet & Antoinette D I van Asselt & Karin M Vermeulen & Paul F M Krabbe, 2020. "Value judgment of new medical treatments: Societal and patient perspectives to inform priority setting in The Netherlands," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, July.
    13. McNamara, Simon & Tsuchiya, Aki & Holmes, John, 2021. "Does the UK-public's aversion to inequalities in health differ by group-labelling and health-gain type? A choice-experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 269(C).
    14. Nikolai Mühlberger & Gaby Sroczynski & Artemisa Gogollari & Beate Jahn & Nora Pashayan & Ewout Steyerberg & Martin Widschwendter & Uwe Siebert, 2021. "Cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening and prevention: a systematic review with a focus on risk-adapted strategies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(8), pages 1311-1344, November.
    15. Yasuhiro Hagiwara & Takeru Shiroiwa, 2022. "Estimating Value-Based Price and Quantifying Uncertainty around It in Health Technology Assessment: Frequentist and Bayesian Approaches," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 42(5), pages 672-683, July.
    16. Dina Jankovic & Pedro Saramago Goncalves & Lina Gega & David Marshall & Kath Wright & Meena Hafidh & Rachel Churchill & Laura Bojke, 2022. "Cost Effectiveness of Digital Interventions for Generalised Anxiety Disorder: A Model-Based Analysis," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 377-388, May.
    17. Boshen Jiao & Zafar Zafari & Brian Will & Kai Ruggeri & Shukai Li & Peter Muennig, 2017. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Lowering Permissible Noise Levels Around U.S. Airports," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-10, December.
    18. Stefan A. Lipman & Werner B. F. Brouwer & Arthur E. Attema, 2020. "What is it going to be, TTO or SG? A direct test of the validity of health state valuation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(11), pages 1475-1481, November.
    19. Agbaya Stéphane Serge Oga & Akissi Régine Attia-konan & Fulgence Vehi & Jérôme Kouame & Kouamé Koffi, 2019. "Diabetic and cardiovascular patients’ willingness to pay for upcoming national health insurance scheme in Côte d’Ivoire," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-8, December.
    20. Arthur E. Attema & Han Bleichrodt & Olivier L’Haridon & Patrick Peretti-Watel & Valérie Seror, 2018. "Discounting health and money: New evidence using a more robust method," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 117-140, April.

    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:43:y:2023:i:6:p:692-703. 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.