Cargando…

Rescaling quality of life values from discrete choice experiments for use as QALYs: a cautionary tale

BACKGROUND: Researchers are increasingly investigating the potential for ordinal tasks such as ranking and discrete choice experiments to estimate QALY health state values. However, the assumptions of random utility theory, which underpin the statistical models used to provide these estimates, have...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Flynn, Terry N, Louviere, Jordan J, Marley, Anthony AJ, Coast, Joanna, Peters, Tim J
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2599891/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18945358
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-7954-6-6
_version_ 1782162112238321664
author Flynn, Terry N
Louviere, Jordan J
Marley, Anthony AJ
Coast, Joanna
Peters, Tim J
author_facet Flynn, Terry N
Louviere, Jordan J
Marley, Anthony AJ
Coast, Joanna
Peters, Tim J
author_sort Flynn, Terry N
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Researchers are increasingly investigating the potential for ordinal tasks such as ranking and discrete choice experiments to estimate QALY health state values. However, the assumptions of random utility theory, which underpin the statistical models used to provide these estimates, have received insufficient attention. In particular, the assumptions made about the decisions between living states and the death state are not satisfied, at least for some people. Estimated values are likely to be incorrectly anchored with respect to death (zero) in such circumstances. METHODS: Data from the Investigating Choice Experiments for the preferences of older people CAPability instrument (ICECAP) valuation exercise were analysed. The values (previously anchored to the worst possible state) were rescaled using an ordinal model proposed previously to estimate QALY-like values. Bootstrapping was conducted to vary artificially the proportion of people who conformed to the conventional random utility model underpinning the analyses. RESULTS: Only 26% of respondents conformed unequivocally to the assumptions of conventional random utility theory. At least 14% of respondents unequivocally violated the assumptions. Varying the relative proportions of conforming respondents in sensitivity analyses led to large changes in the estimated QALY values, particularly for lower-valued states. As a result these values could be either positive (considered to be better than death) or negative (considered to be worse than death). CONCLUSION: Use of a statistical model such as conditional (multinomial) regression to anchor quality of life values from ordinal data to death is inappropriate in the presence of respondents who do not conform to the assumptions of conventional random utility theory. This is clearest when estimating values for that group of respondents observed in valuation samples who refuse to consider any living state to be worse than death: in such circumstances the model cannot be estimated. Only a valuation task requiring respondents to make choices in which both length and quality of life vary can produce estimates that properly reflect the preferences of all respondents.
format Text
id pubmed-2599891
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-25998912008-12-11 Rescaling quality of life values from discrete choice experiments for use as QALYs: a cautionary tale Flynn, Terry N Louviere, Jordan J Marley, Anthony AJ Coast, Joanna Peters, Tim J Popul Health Metr Research BACKGROUND: Researchers are increasingly investigating the potential for ordinal tasks such as ranking and discrete choice experiments to estimate QALY health state values. However, the assumptions of random utility theory, which underpin the statistical models used to provide these estimates, have received insufficient attention. In particular, the assumptions made about the decisions between living states and the death state are not satisfied, at least for some people. Estimated values are likely to be incorrectly anchored with respect to death (zero) in such circumstances. METHODS: Data from the Investigating Choice Experiments for the preferences of older people CAPability instrument (ICECAP) valuation exercise were analysed. The values (previously anchored to the worst possible state) were rescaled using an ordinal model proposed previously to estimate QALY-like values. Bootstrapping was conducted to vary artificially the proportion of people who conformed to the conventional random utility model underpinning the analyses. RESULTS: Only 26% of respondents conformed unequivocally to the assumptions of conventional random utility theory. At least 14% of respondents unequivocally violated the assumptions. Varying the relative proportions of conforming respondents in sensitivity analyses led to large changes in the estimated QALY values, particularly for lower-valued states. As a result these values could be either positive (considered to be better than death) or negative (considered to be worse than death). CONCLUSION: Use of a statistical model such as conditional (multinomial) regression to anchor quality of life values from ordinal data to death is inappropriate in the presence of respondents who do not conform to the assumptions of conventional random utility theory. This is clearest when estimating values for that group of respondents observed in valuation samples who refuse to consider any living state to be worse than death: in such circumstances the model cannot be estimated. Only a valuation task requiring respondents to make choices in which both length and quality of life vary can produce estimates that properly reflect the preferences of all respondents. BioMed Central 2008-10-22 /pmc/articles/PMC2599891/ /pubmed/18945358 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-7954-6-6 Text en Copyright © 2008 Flynn et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Flynn, Terry N
Louviere, Jordan J
Marley, Anthony AJ
Coast, Joanna
Peters, Tim J
Rescaling quality of life values from discrete choice experiments for use as QALYs: a cautionary tale
title Rescaling quality of life values from discrete choice experiments for use as QALYs: a cautionary tale
title_full Rescaling quality of life values from discrete choice experiments for use as QALYs: a cautionary tale
title_fullStr Rescaling quality of life values from discrete choice experiments for use as QALYs: a cautionary tale
title_full_unstemmed Rescaling quality of life values from discrete choice experiments for use as QALYs: a cautionary tale
title_short Rescaling quality of life values from discrete choice experiments for use as QALYs: a cautionary tale
title_sort rescaling quality of life values from discrete choice experiments for use as qalys: a cautionary tale
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2599891/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18945358
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-7954-6-6
work_keys_str_mv AT flynnterryn rescalingqualityoflifevaluesfromdiscretechoiceexperimentsforuseasqalysacautionarytale
AT louvierejordanj rescalingqualityoflifevaluesfromdiscretechoiceexperimentsforuseasqalysacautionarytale
AT marleyanthonyaj rescalingqualityoflifevaluesfromdiscretechoiceexperimentsforuseasqalysacautionarytale
AT coastjoanna rescalingqualityoflifevaluesfromdiscretechoiceexperimentsforuseasqalysacautionarytale
AT peterstimj rescalingqualityoflifevaluesfromdiscretechoiceexperimentsforuseasqalysacautionarytale