US Valuation of the SF-6D

Benjamin M. Craig, A. Simon Pickard, Elly Stolk and John E. Brazier

Medical Decision Making, 2013, vol. 33, issue 6, 793-803

Abstract: Background. The original SF-6D valuation study collected 3503 standard gambled responses from 611 UK respondents to predict quality-adjusted life year (QALY) values. Methods. Using 19,980 paired comparison responses from 666 US respondents and a stacked probit model, the 25 coefficients of the original SF-6D multiattribute utility (MAU) regression were estimated, such that each coefficient represents a QALY decrement. The US QALY predictions were compared with UK predictions using 8428 SF-6D states in the US Medicare Health Outcomes Survey (MHOS), 1998 to 2003. Results. Twenty-two of the 25 decrements in the SF-6D MAU regression are statistically significant. The remaining decrements are insignificant based on US and UK results. The US and UK QALY predictions for the MHOS SF-6D states are remarkably similar given differences in experimental design, format, and sampling (Lin’s coefficient of agreement, 0.941; absolute mean difference, 0.043). Limitations. The underlying theoretical framework for the study design and econometric analysis builds from the episodic random utility model and the concept of QALYs and inherits their limitations. Conclusions. This study enhances the potential for US comparative effectiveness research by translating SF-6D states into US QALYs as well as improves upon discrete choice experiment design and econometric methods for health valuation.

Keywords: econometric methods; mathematical models; decision analysis; preferences and quality of life; statistical methods (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2013
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X13482524 (text/html)

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:sae:medema:v:33:y:2013:i:6:p:793-803

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X13482524

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().