A Comparison of the SF-6Dv2 and SF-6D UK Utility Values in a Mixed Patient and Healthy Population

Emily McDool (), Clara Mukuria and John Brazier
Additional contact information
Emily McDool: The University of Sheffield
Clara Mukuria: The University of Sheffield
John Brazier: The University of Sheffield

PharmacoEconomics, 2021, vol. 39, issue 8, No 6, 929-940

Abstract: Abstract Background This paper describes the first evaluation of the construct validity and performance of the newly developed preference-based measure of health, the SF-6D version 2 (SF-6Dv2). Method Utilising data from the Multi-Instrument Comparison (MIC) project (n = 7932), we explored the descriptive differences in utility values between the SF-6Dv2 and the SF-6D and evaluated the known group validity of both measures by testing the statistical significance of differences in utility values and calculating the effect sizes across known groups. The convergent validity of the SF-6Dv2 was explored by examining whether the SF-6Dv2 is related to alternative validated measures, including the EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D. Results Differences between the utility values of the SF-6Dv2 and SF-6D were evident; utilities were generally lower for the SF-6Dv2, with larger standard deviations resulting in larger absolute differences between groups. The SF-6Dv2 performed well in terms of known-group validity and successfully distinguished disease severity and between the disease and healthy groups, outperforming the SF-6D in some but not all groups. Convergent validity analyses indicated strong associations between the SF-6Dv2 and the SF-6D, EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D utilities. Conclusions The psychometric performance of the SF-6Dv2 is favourable with respect to known group validity and convergent validity, but does not seem to have improved, compared with the SF-6D. However, the new method of valuation has had a substantial impact on the size of absolute differences in utility values, which could impact quality-adjusted life-year results. The economic evaluation of health interventions may therefore be influenced by the choice of the SF-6Dv2 over the SF-6D.

Date: 2021
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-021-01033-6 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:spr:pharme:v:39:y:2021:i:8:d:10.1007_s40273-021-01033-6

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40273

DOI: 10.1007/s40273-021-01033-6

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().