It might be premature to reject the assumption of a power curve relationship between VAS and SG data: three comments on Stevens, McCabe and Brazier's ‘Mapping between VAS and SG data; results from the UK HUI Index 2 valuation survey’

Amir Shmueli

Health Economics, 2007, vol. 16, issue 7, 755-758

Abstract: In a recent paper in Health Economics, Stevens, McCabe and Brazier (Health Econ. 2006; 15: 527–533.) found that the cubic relationship between Visual Analog Scale (VAS) values and standard gamble (SG) utilities was superior to other functional forms in terms of explanatory power and predictive ability. Consequently, they question the reliance on the assumption of a power curve relationship, which was established, theoretically and empirically, in earlier works. This note argues that: (1) SMB's conclusions are incorrect. The estimated cubic function overfits the four data points, and is questionable with respect to the implied attitude toward relative risk. (2) The evaluation of the functional forms in terms of the individual predictions' mean absolute error is misleading and (3) correcting for heteroscedasticity improves the precision of the estimates and of the predictions. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Date: 2007
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1188

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:wly:hlthec:v:16:y:2007:i:7:p:755-758

Access Statistics for this article

Health Economics is currently edited by Alan Maynard, John Hutton and Andrew Jones

More articles in Health Economics from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().