Empirically defined health states for depression from the SF-12.

OBJECTIVE To define objectively and describe a set of clinically relevant health states that encompass the typical effects of depression on quality of life in an actual patient population. Our model was designed to facilitate the elicitation of patients' and the public's values (utilities) for outcomes of depression. DATA SOURCES From the depression panel of the Medical Outcomes Study. Data include scores on the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) as well as independently obtained diagnoses of depression for 716 patients. Follow-up information, one year after baseline, was available for 166 of these patients. METHODOLOGY We use k-means cluster analysis to group the patients according to appropriate dimensions of health derived from the SF-12 scores. Chi-squared and exact permutation tests are used to validate the health states thus obtained, by checking for baseline and longitudinal correlation of cluster membership and clinical diagnosis. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS We find, on the basis of a combination of statistical and clinical criteria, that six states are optimal for summarizing the range of health experienced by depressed patients. Each state is described in terms of a subject who is typical in a sense that is articulated with our cluster-analytic approach. In all of our models, the relationship between health state membership and clinical diagnosis is highly statistically significant. The models are also sensitive to changes in patients' clinical status over time. CONCLUSIONS Cluster analysis is demonstrably a powerful methodology for forming clinically valid health states from health status data. The states produced are suitable for the experimental elicitation of preference and analyses of costs and utilities.

[1]  John A. Hartigan,et al.  Clustering Algorithms , 1975 .

[2]  L. A. Goodman,et al.  Measures of association for cross classifications , 1979 .

[3]  G. Torrance Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. , 1986, Journal of health economics.

[4]  R M Kaplan,et al.  Health outcome models for policy analysis. , 1989, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[5]  Thomas M. Cover,et al.  Elements of Information Theory , 2005 .

[6]  George W. Torrance,et al.  Methodologic challenges in the development of utility measures of health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis. , 1991, Controlled clinical trials.

[7]  Allen Gersho,et al.  Vector quantization and signal compression , 1991, The Kluwer international series in engineering and computer science.

[8]  Ali S. Hadi,et al.  Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Chster Analysis , 1991 .

[9]  A. Stewart,et al.  Measuring Functioning and Well-Being: The Medical Outcomes Study Approach , 1992 .

[10]  Robert Tibshirani,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap , 1994 .

[11]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  The RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0. , 1993, Health economics.

[12]  Aaron D. Wyner,et al.  Coding Theorems for a Discrete Source With a Fidelity CriterionInstitute of Radio Engineers, International Convention Record, vol. 7, 1959. , 1993 .

[13]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  Caring for depression , 1996 .

[14]  J. Ware,et al.  A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. , 1996, Medical care.

[15]  J. Larson The MOS 36-Item Short form Health Survey , 1997, Evaluation & the health professions.

[16]  D. Osoba,et al.  Measuring health-related quality of life. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.