Eliciting SF-6Dv2 health state utilities using an anchored best-worst scaling technique

Ahmed M.Y. Osman, Jing Wu, Xiaoning He and Gang Chen

Social Science & Medicine, 2021, vol. 279, issue C

Abstract: There is an increasing interest in using ordinal data collection methods, such as the best-worst scaling (BWS), to develop preference-based tariffs (value sets) for health-related quality of life instruments, yet the evidence on their performance is limited. This paper proposed to use an anchored BWS technique (in which the state of “death” served as an anchoring state) to directly develop a utility weight that lies on a scale anchored at 0 = death and 1 = full health for the Simplified Chinese version of the Short Form 6 Dimension version 2 (SF-6Dv2). An online panel from the general population of Mainland China completed an online survey between 20th July and 19th August, 2019 and 463 respondents were included in the main analysis. The Conditional Logit (CL) model, which assumes a homogeneous preference, as well as a Hierarchical Bayes (HB) model, which accounts for preference heterogeneity, were used to analyze the BWS data. The model performances were evaluated based on monotonicity and model-fit statistics. The majority of respondents indicated that the BWS questions were easy to understand and complete. Initial analyses suggested that the best and worst choices should not be pooled together. Based on model fit statistics of separated estimations and previous literature on health state valuation studies using BWS, the best choices were used for developing the final algorithm. The HB estimates were found to have better model performance than the CL estimates. This study provides an essential insight into using an anchored BWS approach in health state valuation. Furthermore, it demonstrates the advantage of using HB compared to the traditional CL model in producing preference values.

Keywords: Anchored best-worst scaling; SF-6Dv2; Health utilities; China; QALY; Economic evaluation; Hierarchical bayes (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953621003506
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:socmed:v:279:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621003506

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
http://www.elsevier. ... _01_ooc_1&version=01

DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114018

Access Statistics for this article

Social Science & Medicine is currently edited by Ichiro (I.) Kawachi and S.V. (S.V.) Subramanian

More articles in Social Science & Medicine from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().