scholarly journals Rescaling quality of life values from discrete choice experiments for use as QALYs: a cautionary tale

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Terry N Flynn ◽  
Jordan J Louviere ◽  
Anthony AJ Marley ◽  
Joanna Coast ◽  
Tim J Peters
2019 ◽  
Vol 104 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva K Fenwick ◽  
Nick Bansback ◽  
Alfred Tau Liang Gan ◽  
Julie Ratcliffe ◽  
Leonie Burgess ◽  
...  

Background/aimsTo validate a preference-based Diabetic Retinopathy Utility Index (DRU-I) using discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods and assess disutilities associated with vision-threatening DR (VTDR: severe non-proliferative DR, proliferative DR and clinically significant macular oedema) and associated vision impairment.MethodsThe DRU-I comprises five quality-of-life dimensions, including Visual symptoms, Activity limitation/mobility, Lighting and glare, Socio-emotional well-being and Inconvenience, each rated as no, some, or a lot of difficulty. The DRU-I was developed using a DCE comprising six blocks of nine choice sets which, alongside the EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D-3L) and Vision and Quality of Life (VisQoL) utility instruments, were interviewer-administered to participants. To ensure the DRU-I was sensitive to severe disease, we oversampled patients with VTDR. Data were analysed using conditional logit regression.ResultsOf the 220 participants (mean±SD age 60.1±11.3 years; 70.9% men), 57 (29.1%) and 139 (70.9%) had non-VTDR and VTDR, respectively, while 157 (71.4%), 20 (9.4%) and 37 (17.3%) had no, mild or moderate/severe vision impairment, respectively. Regression coefficients for all dimensions were ordered as expected, with worsening levels in each dimension being less preferred (theoretical validity). DRU-I utilities decreased as DR severity (non-VTDR=0.87; VTDR=0.80; p=0.021) and better eye vision impairment (none=0.84; mild=0.78; moderate/severe=0.72; p=0.012) increased. DRU-I utilities had low (r=0.39) and moderate (r=0.58) correlation with EQ-5D and VisQoL utilities, respectively (convergent validity).DiscussionThe DRU-I can estimate utilities associated with vision-threatening DR and associated vision impairment. It has the potential to assess the cost-effectiveness of DR interventions from a patient perspective and inform policies on resource allocation relating to DR.


Author(s):  
Charlotte Beaudart ◽  
◽  
Jürgen M. Bauer ◽  
Francesco Landi ◽  
Olivier Bruyère ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and aims To assess experts’ preference for sarcopenia outcomes. Methods A discrete-choice experiment was conducted among 37 experts (medical doctors and researchers) from different countries around the world. In the survey, they were repetitively asked to choose which one of two hypothetical patients suffering from sarcopenia deserves the most a treatment. The two hypothetical patients differed in five pre-selected sarcopenia outcomes: quality of life, mobility, domestic activities, fatigue and falls. A mixed logit panel model was used to estimate the relative importance of each attribute. Results All sarcopenia outcomes were shown to be significant, and thus, important for experts. Overall, the most important sarcopenia outcome was falls (27%) followed by domestic activities and mobility (24%), quality of life (15%) and fatigue (10%). Discussion and conclusion Compared to patient’s preferences, experts considered falls as a more important outcome of sarcopenia, while the outcomes fatigue and difficulties in domestic activities were considered as less important.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document