IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v11y2002i4p341-353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating an EQ‐5D population value set: the case of Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Aki Tsuchiya
  • Shunya Ikeda
  • Naoki Ikegami
  • Shuzo Nishimura
  • Ikuro Sakai
  • Takashi Fukuda
  • Chisato Hamashima
  • Akinori Hisashige
  • Makoto Tamura

Abstract

Quality adjustment weights for quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) are available with the EQ‐5D Instrument, which are based on a survey that quantified the preferences of the British public. However, the extent to which this British value set is applicable to other, especially non‐European, countries is yet unclear. The objectives of this study are (a) to compare the valuations obtained in Japan and Britain, and (b) to explore a local Japanese value set. A diminished study design is employed, where 17 hypothetical EQ‐5D health states are evaluated as opposed to 42 in the British study. The official Japanese version of the instrument and the Time Trade‐Off method are used to interview 543 members of the public. The results are: firstly, the evaluations obtained in Japan and those from Britain differ by 0.24 on average on a [−1, +1] scale, and mean absolute error (MAE) in predicting the Japanese preferences with the British value set is 0.23. Secondly, comparable regressions suggest that the two peoples have systematically different preference structures (p

Suggested Citation

  • Aki Tsuchiya & Shunya Ikeda & Naoki Ikegami & Shuzo Nishimura & Ikuro Sakai & Takashi Fukuda & Chisato Hamashima & Akinori Hisashige & Makoto Tamura, 2002. "Estimating an EQ‐5D population value set: the case of Japan," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 341-353, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:11:y:2002:i:4:p:341-353
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.673
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.673
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hec.673?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. Donald L. Patrick & Helene E. Starks & Kevin C. Cain & Richard F. Uhlmann & Robert A. Pearlman, 1994. "Measuring Preferences for Health States Worse than Death," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 14(1), pages 9-18, February.
    2. Claire Gudex, 1994. "Time trade-off user manual: props and self-completion methods," Working Papers 020cheop, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    3. Paul Dolan & Claire Gudex & Paul Kind & Alan Williams, 1995. "A social tariff for EuroQol: results from a UK general population survey," Working Papers 138chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    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. Brazier, John & Roberts, Jennifer & Deverill, Mark, 2002. "The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 271-292, March.
    2. McTaggart-Cowan, Helen & Tsuchiya, Aki & O'Cathain, Alicia & Brazier, John, 2011. "Understanding the effect of disease adaptation information on general population values for hypothetical health states," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(11), pages 1904-1912, June.
    3. Craig., Benjamin M. & Busschbach, Jan J.V., 2011. "Revisiting United States valuation of EQ-5D states," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 1057-1063.
    4. Paul Dolan & Claire Gudex & Paul Kind & Alan Williams, 1995. "A social tariff for EuroQol: results from a UK general population survey," Working Papers 138chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    5. Asrul Akmal Shafie & Annushiah Vasan Thakumar, 2020. "Multiplicative modelling of EQ-5D-3L TTO and VAS values," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(9), pages 1411-1420, December.
    6. Craig, Benjamin M. & Oppe, Mark, 2010. "From a different angle: A novel approach to health valuation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 169-174, January.
    7. L. M. Lamers & J. McDonnell & P. F. M. Stalmeier & P. F. M. Krabbe & J. J. V. Busschbach, 2006. "The Dutch tariff: results and arguments for an effective design for national EQ‐5D valuation studies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(10), pages 1121-1132, October.
    8. José‐María Abellán‐Perpiñán & José‐Luis Pinto‐Prades & Ildefonso Méndez‐Martínez & Xabier Badía‐Llach, 2006. "Towards a better QALY model," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(7), pages 665-676, July.
    9. Stevens, K, 2010. "Valuation of the Child Health Utility Index 9D (CHU9D)," MPRA Paper 29938, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Gisela Kobelt & J. Berg & P. Lindgren, 2006. "Costs and quality of life in multiple sclerosis in The Netherlands," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 7(02), pages 55-64, July.
    11. Emma McIntosh, 2006. "Using Discrete Choice Experiments within a Cost-Benefit Analysis Framework," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 24(9), pages 855-868, September.
    12. Lieven Annemans & Mélanie Brignone & Sylvain Druais & Ann Pauw & Aline Gauthier & Koen Demyttenaere, 2014. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Pharmaceutical Treatment Options in the First-Line Management of Major Depressive Disorder in Belgium," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 479-493, May.
    13. Gisela Kobelt & J. Berg & P. Lindgren & G. Izquierdo & O. Sánchez-Soliño & J. Pérez-Miranda & M. Casado, 2006. "Costs and quality of life of multiple sclerosis in Spain," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 7(2), pages 65-74, July.
    14. José Nunes, 1998. "Economic evaluation of rehabilitation: The quality of life approach using EuroQol," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 4(2), pages 192-201, May.
    15. Marisa Santos & Monica A. C. T. Cintra & Andrea L. Monteiro & Braulio Santos & Fernando Gusmão-filho & Mônica Viegas Andrade & Kenya Noronha & Luciane N. Cruz & Suzi Camey & Bernardo Tura & Paul Kin, 2016. "Brazilian Valuation of EQ-5D-3L Health States," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(2), pages 253-263, February.
    16. Carol Graham & Lucas Higuera & Eduardo Lora, 2011. "Which health conditions cause the most unhappiness?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(12), pages 1431-1447, December.
    17. José‐Luis Pinto‐Prades & José‐María Abellán‐Perpiñán, 2005. "Measuring the health of populations: the veil of ignorance approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 69-82, January.
    18. Lena Lundberg & Magnus Johannesson & Dag G.L. Isacson & Lars Borgquist, 1999. "The Relationship between Health-state Utilities and the SF-12 in a General Population," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 19(2), pages 128-140, April.
    19. Ramesh Lamsal & Jennifer D. Zwicker, 2017. "Economic Evaluation of Interventions for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Opportunities and Challenges," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 763-772, December.
    20. Brazier, John & Rowen, Donna & Tsuchiya, Aki & Yang, Yaling & Young, Tracy A., 2011. "The impact of adding an extra dimension to a preference-based measure," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 245-253, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:hlthec:v:11:y:2002:i:4:p:341-353. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    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.