In this sub-set , it was found that method ological differences contributed to variation in utility values .
Direct methods often yielded higher scores than did indirect methods .
Within direct methods , there were no clear trends in head-to-head studies ( st and ard gamble [ SG ] vs time trade-off ) ; but general population respondents often provided lower scores than did patients with the disease when evaluating the same health states with SG methods .
When comparing indirect methods , the EQ-5D typically yielded higher values than the SF-6D , but also showed more sensitivity to differences in health states .
When selecting CVD utility values for an economic model , consideration of the utility elicitation method is important , as this review demonstrates that methodology of choice impacts utility values in CVD
AIMS Utility values inform estimates of the cost-effectiveness of treatment for cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) , but values can vary depending on the method used .
The aim of this systematic literature review ( SLR ) was to explore how methods of elicitation impact utility values for CVD .
Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 health surveys in a general population survey in Alberta, Canada.
OBJECTIVES The purpose s of this analysis were to evaluate the construct validity of the EQ-5D and compare responses on the EQ-5D with the Physical Component Summary ( PCS-12 ) and Mental Component Summary ( MCS-12 ) scores of the SF-12 Health Survey . METHODS Data were collected via a survey instrument mailed to 4,200 r and omly selected subjects in the province of Alberta , Canada . The instrument contained the EQ-5D and SF-12 health surveys , with additional questions eliciting clinical and demographic information from the respondents . RESULTS 1,555 respondents returned mailed question naires ; 606 question naires were returned undeliverable . The SF-12 summary scores were calculated for 1,380 respondents . Analysis of the EQ-5D responses by demographic variables found significant differences among categories of age , gender , and self-reported chronic medical conditions . Corresponding dimensions and summary scores were more strongly related ( eg , mobility and PCS-12 ; F ratio = 598.3 , P < 0.001 ) than dissimilar dimensions ( eg , mobility and MCS-12 ; F ratio = 18.8 , P < 0.001 ) . The EQ-5D index scores were moderately correlated with SF-12 summary scores ( r = 0.41 for MCS-12 and r = 0.68 for PCS-12 ) . For subjects reporting no problems on the EQ-5D , PCS-12 and MCS-12 scores were significantly lower for people reporting medical problems or feelings of depression . CONCLUSIONS The results of this investigation generally supported the validity of the EQ-5D . However , an important ceiling effect was observed for the EQ-5D in this sample . The combination of the EQ-5D and SF-12 provides relatively broad coverage of important health domains and scores for various purpose
In this sub-set , it was found that method ological differences contributed to variation in utility values .
Direct methods often yielded higher scores than did indirect methods .
Within direct methods , there were no clear trends in head-to-head studies ( st and ard gamble [ SG ] vs time trade-off ) ; but general population respondents often provided lower scores than did patients with the disease when evaluating the same health states with SG methods .
When comparing indirect methods , the EQ-5D typically yielded higher values than the SF-6D , but also showed more sensitivity to differences in health states .
When selecting CVD utility values for an economic model , consideration of the utility elicitation method is important , as this review demonstrates that methodology of choice impacts utility values in CVD
AIMS Utility values inform estimates of the cost-effectiveness of treatment for cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) , but values can vary depending on the method used .
The aim of this systematic literature review ( SLR ) was to explore how methods of elicitation impact utility values for CVD .