Using Both Time Tradeoff and Discrete Choice Experiments in Valuing the EQ-5D: Impact of Model Misspecification on Value Sets

Ian Waudby-Smith, A. Simon Pickard, Feng Xie and Eleanor M. Pullenayegum
Additional contact information
Ian Waudby-Smith: Department of Statistics & Data Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
A. Simon Pickard: College of Pharmacy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
Feng Xie: Department of Health, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
Eleanor M. Pullenayegum: Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada

Medical Decision Making, 2020, vol. 40, issue 4, 483-497

Abstract: Introduction. The EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol contains both time tradeoff (TTO) tasks and discrete choice experiments (DCE), raising the question of how to best use these in creating a value set. The hybrid model, which combines TTO and DCE data, has emerged as a commonly used approach. However, this model assumes independence among responses from the same individual, a linear relationship between TTO and DCE utilities, and, in many implementations, homoscedastic residuals. The aims of this study are to examine alternatives to these assumptions and determine the impact of misspecification on value sets. Methods. We performed a simulation study, parameterized using the US EQ-5D-5L valuation study, to assess the impact of model misspecification. We simulated TTO and DCE data with nonlinear relationships between TTO and DCE utilities, heteroscedastic errors, and correlated responses. Simulated data were analyzed using hybrid models with and without heteroscedasticity, Tobit models with and without heteroscedasticity, a latent class model, and a mixed model. Results. Mean absolute errors (MAEs) for correctly specified models were 0.1. When a linear relationship between TTO and DCE utilities held, using both TTO and DCE data under correct specification yielded smaller MAEs compared with using TTO data alone but yielded larger MAEs when a linear relationship did not hold. Mistakenly assuming homoscedasticity led to increased MAEs, whereas ignoring dependence did not. Conclusions. Because heteroscedasticity in TTO utilities and nonlinear associations between DCE and TTO utilities have been noted, we recommend careful assessment of scedasticity and linearity to ascertain the suitability of a hybrid model.

Keywords: discrete choice experiment; EQ-5D; health utility; time trade-off; valuation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X20924019 (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:40:y:2020:i:4:p:483-497

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X20924019

Access Statistics for this article

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