Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWailoo, Allan J
dc.contributor.authorAlava, Monica Hernandez
dc.contributor.authorPudney, Stephen
dc.contributor.authorBarton, Garry
dc.contributor.authorO’Dwyer, John
dc.contributor.authorGomes, Manuel
dc.contributor.authorIrvine, Lisa
dc.contributor.authorMeads, David
dc.contributor.authorSadique, Zia
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-18T16:30:04Z
dc.date.available2021-01-18T16:30:04Z
dc.date.issued2021-01-06
dc.identifier.citationWailoo , A J , Alava , M H , Pudney , S , Barton , G , O’Dwyer , J , Gomes , M , Irvine , L , Meads , D & Sadique , Z 2021 , ' An International Comparison of EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis ' , Value in Health . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2020.11.012
dc.identifier.issn1098-3015
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 24316885
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: efcd8f7b-6669-48ca-b3d8-4eb28a39f5a1
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 85098954933
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0003-1936-3584/work/87354128
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2299/23695
dc.description© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This manuscript is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Licence http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To estimate the impact of using EQ5D-5L (5L) compared with EQ5D-3L (3L) in cost-effectiveness analyses in 6 countries with 3L and 5L values: Germany, Japan, Korea, The Netherlands, China, and Spain. Methods: Eight cost-effectiveness analyses based on clinical studies with 3L provided 11 pairwise comparisons. We estimated cost-effectiveness by applying the appropriate country values for 3L to observed responses. We re-estimated cost-effectiveness for each country by predicting the 5L tariff score for each respondent, for each country, using a previously published mapping method. We compared results in terms of impact on estimated incremental quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain and cost-effectiveness ratios. Results: For most countries the impact of moving from 3L to 5L is to lower the incremental QALY gain in the majority of comparisons. The only exception to this was Japan, where 4 out of 11 cases (37%) saw lower QALYs gained when using 5L. The mean and median reductions in health gain, in those case studies where 5L does lead to lower health gain, are largest in The Netherlands (84% mean reduction, 41% median reduction), Germany (68% and 27%), and Spain (30% and 31%). For most countries, those studies where 5L leads to lower health gain see larger reductions than the gains in studies showing the opposite tendency. Conclusions: Overall, 3L and 5L are not interchangeable in these countries. Differences between results are large, but the direction of change can be unpredictable. These findings should prompt further investigation into the reasons for differences.en
dc.format.extent7
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofValue in Health
dc.rightsEmbargoed
dc.subjectEQ5D
dc.subjectQALYs
dc.subjectutility
dc.subjectHealth Policy
dc.subjectPublic Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
dc.titleAn International Comparison of EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Analysisen
dc.contributor.institutionCentre for Research in Public Health and Community Care
dc.description.statusPeer reviewed
dc.date.embargoedUntil2022-01-06
dc.identifier.urlhttp://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85098954933&partnerID=8YFLogxK
dc.description.versiontypeFinal Accepted Version
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-01-06
rioxxterms.versionAM
rioxxterms.versionofrecordhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2020.11.012
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
herts.preservation.rarelyaccessedtrue
herts.rights.accesstypeEmbargoed


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record