Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRichards, Derek
dc.date.accessioned2022-04-14T07:16:24Z
dc.date.available2022-04-14T07:16:24Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.date.submitted2022en
dc.identifier.citationFranklin, M., Hunter, R.M., Enrique, A., Palacios, J., Richards, D., Estimating cost-effectiveness using alternative preference-based scores and within-trial methods: exploring the dynamics of the QALY using the EQ-5D-5L and ReQoL-UI, Value in Health, 2022en
dc.identifier.otherY
dc.descriptionPUBLISHEDen
dc.description.abstractObjectives: This study aimed to explore quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and subsequent cost-effectiveness estimates based on the more physical health–focused EQ-5D 5-level version (EQ-5D-5L) value set for England or cross-walked EQ-5D 3-level version UK value set scores or more mental health recovery-focused Recovering Quality of Life Utility Index (ReQoL-UI), when using alternative within-trial statistical methods. We describe possible reasons for the different QALY estimates based on the interaction between item scores, health state profiles, preference-based scores, and mathematical and statistical methods chosen. Methods: QALYs are calculated over 8 weeks from a case study 2:1 (intervention:control) randomized controlled trial in patients with anxiety or depression. Complete case and with missing cases imputed using multiple-imputation analyses are conducted, using unadjusted and regression baseline-adjusted QALYs. Cost-effectiveness is judged using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and acceptability curves. We use previously established psychometric results to reflect on estimated QALYs. Results: A total of 361 people (241:120) were randomized. EQ-5D-5L crosswalk produced higher incremental QALYs than the value set for England or ReQoL-UI, which produced similar unadjusted QALYs, but contrasting baseline-adjusted QALYs. Probability of cost-effectiveness <£30 000 per QALY ranged from 6% (complete case ReQoL-UI baseline-adjusted QALYs) to 64.3% (multiple-imputation EQ-5D-5L crosswalk unadjusted QALYs). The control arm improved more on average than the intervention arm on the ReQoL-UI, a result not mirrored on the EQ-5D-5L nor condition-specific (Patient-Health Questionnaire-9, depression; Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, anxiety) measures. Conclusions: ReQoL-UI produced contradictory cost-effectiveness results relative to the EQ-5D-5L. The EQ-5D-5L’s better responsiveness and “anxiety/depression” and “usual activities” items drove the incremental QALY results. The ReQoL-UI’s single physical health item and “personal recovery” construct may have influenced its lower 8-week incremental QALY estimates in this patient sample.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesValue in Health;
dc.rightsYen
dc.subjectAnxietyen
dc.subjectCrosswalken
dc.subjectDepressionen
dc.subjectEconomic evaluationen
dc.subjectEQ-5D-5Len
dc.subjectQALYen
dc.subjectRecoveryen
dc.subjectReQoL-UIen
dc.subjectPreference-baseden
dc.titleEstimating cost-effectiveness using alternative preference-based scores and within-trial methods: exploring the dynamics of the QALY using the EQ-5D-5L and ReQoL-UIen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.type.supercollectionscholarly_publicationsen
dc.type.supercollectionrefereed_publicationsen
dc.identifier.peoplefinderurlhttp://people.tcd.ie/drichard
dc.identifier.rssinternalid242370
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2021.11.1358
dc.rights.ecaccessrightsopenAccess
dc.identifier.orcid_id0000-0003-0871-4078
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2262/98455


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record