Discrete choice modeling for the quantification of health states: the case of the EQ-5D.

OBJECTIVES Probabilistic models have been developed to establish the relative merit of subjective phenomena by means of specific judgmental tasks involving discrete choices (DCs). The attractiveness of these DC models is that they are embedded in a strong theoretical measurement framework and are based on relatively simple judgmental tasks. The aim of our study was to determine whether the values derived from a DC experiment are comparable to those obtained using other valuation techniques, in particular the time trade-off (TTO). METHODS Two hundred nine students completed several tasks in which we collected DC, rank, visual analog scale, and TTO responses. DC data were also collected in a general population sample (N=444). The DC experiment was designed using a Bayesian approach, and involved 60 choices between two health states and a comparison of all health states to being dead. The DC data were analyzed using a conditional logit and a rank-ordered logit model, relying, respectively, on TTO values and the value for being dead to anchor the DC-derived values to the 0 to 1 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) scale. RESULTS Although modeled DC data broadly replicated the pattern found in TTO responses, the DC consistently produced higher values. The two methods for anchoring DC-derived values on the QALY scale produced similar results. CONCLUSIONS On the basis of the high level of comparability between DC-derived values and TTO values, future valuation studies based on a combination of these two techniques may be considered. The results further suggest that DC can potentially be used as a substitute for TTO.

[1]  Mark Oppe,et al.  EQ-5D Value Sets , 2007 .

[2]  Joanna Coast,et al.  Rescaling quality of life values from discrete choice experiments for use as QALYs: a cautionary tale , 2008, Population health metrics.

[3]  P. Stalmeier,et al.  The Dutch tariff: results and arguments for an effective design for national EQ-5D valuation studies. , 2006, Health economics.

[4]  Riccardo Scarpa,et al.  Designs with a priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice experiments: A Monte Carlo study , 2007 .

[5]  Anthony O'Hagan,et al.  Using rank data to estimate health state utility models. , 2006, Journal of health economics.

[6]  Joshua A Salomon,et al.  Quantification of Health States with Rank-Based Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling , 2007, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[7]  Ann Netten,et al.  Using discrete choice experiments to estimate a preference-based measure of outcome--an application to social care for older people. , 2006, Journal of health economics.

[8]  David A. Hensher,et al.  The Mixed Logit Model: the State of Practice and Warnings for the Unwary , 2001 .

[9]  David A. Hensher,et al.  Handbooks in transport , 2000 .

[10]  Emily Lancsar,et al.  Choice experiments in health: the good, the bad, the ugly and toward a brighter future , 2009, Health Economics, Policy and Law.

[11]  K. Train Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2003 .

[12]  Stephen Joel Coons,et al.  US Valuation of the EQ-5D Health States: Development and Testing of the D1 Valuation Model , 2005, Medical care.

[13]  D. Streiner,et al.  Health Measurement Scales: A practical guide to thier development and use , 1989 .

[14]  L. Thurstone A law of comparative judgment. , 1994 .

[15]  Georg Rasch,et al.  Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests , 1981, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[16]  Ulf Böckenholt,et al.  Structural equation modeling of paired-comparison and ranking data. , 2005, Psychological methods.

[17]  Mark Oppe,et al.  EQ-5D value sets : inventory, comparative review, and user guide , 2007 .

[18]  Z Hakim,et al.  Modelling the EuroQol data: a comparison of discrete choice conjoint and conditional preference modelling. , 1999, Health economics.

[19]  D. Streiner,et al.  Health measurement scales , 2008 .

[20]  L. McKenzie,et al.  Symptom-based outcome measures for asthma: the use of discrete choice methods to assess patient preferences. , 2001, Health policy.

[21]  Paul F. M. Krabbe,et al.  Thurstone Scaling as a Measurement Method to Quantify Subjective Health Outcomes , 2008, Medical care.

[22]  J. Richardson,et al.  Multi-method approach to valuing health states: problems with meaning. , 2006, Health economics.

[23]  Joshua A Salomon,et al.  Reconsidering the use of rankings in the valuation of health states: a model for estimating cardinal values from ordinal data , 2003, Population health metrics.

[24]  John M. Rose,et al.  Stated Preference Experimental Design Strategies , 2007 .

[25]  P. Dolan,et al.  Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. , 1997, Medical care.

[26]  William F. McGhan,et al.  Using Conjoint Analysis to Evaluate Health State Preferences , 1999 .

[27]  D. Hensher,et al.  Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications , 2000 .

[28]  Grazyna Adamiak,et al.  Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 3rd ed , 2006 .

[29]  Joffre Swait,et al.  Stated Choice Methods: Relaxing the IID assumption – introducing variants of the MNL model , 2000 .

[30]  P. Stalmeier,et al.  Testing the interval-level measurement property of multi-item visual analogue scales , 2006, Quality of Life Research.

[31]  J. Brazier,et al.  Valuing Health-Related Quality of Life , 2000, PharmacoEconomics.

[32]  John M. Rose,et al.  THE DESIGN OF STATED CHOICE EXPERIMENTS: THE STATE OF PRACTICE AND FUTURE CHALLENGES , 2004 .

[33]  Tara Symonds,et al.  Using DCE and ranking data to estimate cardinal values for health states for deriving a preference-based single index from the sexual quality of life questionnaire. , 2009, Health economics.

[34]  Kenneth E. Train,et al.  Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2016 .

[35]  M. Drummond,et al.  Health Care Technology: Effectiveness, Efficiency and Public Policy@@@Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes , 1988 .

[36]  M. Ryan,et al.  Using discrete choice modelling in priority setting: an application to clinical service developments. , 2000, Social science & medicine.

[37]  M. Ryan Using conjoint analysis to take account of patient preferences and go beyond health outcomes: an application to in vitro fertilisation. , 1999, Social science & medicine.

[38]  C. Murray,et al.  A multi-method approach to measuring health-state valuations. , 2004, Health economics.

[39]  P. Dolan,et al.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics , 2004, The European Journal of Health Economics, formerly: HEPAC.