Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/114886
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMulhern, B.en
dc.contributor.authorNorman, R.en
dc.contributor.authorLorgelly, P.en
dc.contributor.authorLancsar, E.en
dc.contributor.authorRatcliffe, J.en
dc.contributor.authorBrazier, J.en
dc.contributor.authorViney, R.en
dc.date.issued2017en
dc.identifier.citationPharmacoEconomics, 2017; 35(4):439-451en
dc.identifier.issn1170-7690en
dc.identifier.issn1179-2027en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/114886-
dc.descriptionPublished online: 21 November 2016en
dc.description.abstractBackground Discrete choice experiments with duration (DCETTO) can be used to estimate utility values for preference-based measures, such as the EQ-5D-5L. For self-completion, the health dimensions are presented in a standard order. However, for valuation, this may result in order effects. Thus, it is important to understand whether health state dimension ordering affects values. The aim of this study was to examine the importance of dimension ordering on DCE values using EQ-5D-5L. Methods A choice experiment presenting two health profiles and a third immediate death option was developed. A three-arm study was used, with the same 120 choice sets presented online across each arm (n = 360 per arm). Arm 1 presented the standard EQ-5D-5L dimension order, arm 2 randomised order between respondents, and arm 3 randomised within respondents. Conditional logit regression was used to assess model consistency, and scale parameter testing was used to assess model poolability. Results There were minor inconsistencies across each arm, but the magnitudes of the coefficients produced were generally consistent. Arm 3 produced the largest range of utility values (1 to −0.980). Scale parameter testing suggested that the models did not differ, and the data could be pooled. Follow-up questions did not suggest variation in terms of difficulty. Conclusions The results suggest that the level of randomisation used in DCE health state valuation studies does not significantly impact values, and dimension order may not be as important as other study design issues. The results support past valuation studies that use the standard order of dimensions.en
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityBrendan Mulhern, Richard Norman, Paula Lorgelly, Emily Lancsar, Julie Ratcliffe, John Brazier, Rosalie Vineyen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherSpringer International Publishingen
dc.rights© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016en
dc.subjectHumans; Logistic Models; Choice Behavior; Health Status; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Models, Theoretical; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Middle Aged; Female; Male; Young Adult; Surveys and Questionnairesen
dc.titleIs dimension order important when valuing health states using discrete choice experiments including duration?en
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.identifier.rmid0030098638en
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s40273-016-0475-zen
dc.identifier.pubid439288-
pubs.library.collectionPublic Health publicationsen
pubs.library.teamDS03en
pubs.verification-statusVerifieden
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden
dc.identifier.orcidRatcliffe, J. [0000-0001-7365-1988]en
Appears in Collections:Public Health publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.