New Approach To “Mapping” Treatment Effects To Generic Health-Related Quality Of Life Scales

Published Jan 17, 2013
Bristol, UK - “The benefits of new treatments in improving quality of life have been routinely under-estimated.” That is the conclusion from the first of two papers by Lu, Ades et al. from the University of Bristol. In the paper, Mapping from Disease-Specific to Generic Health-Related Quality-of-Life Scales: A Common Factor Model,” published in Value in Health, they argue that the use of Ordinary Least Squares regression to estimate the “mapping” of treatment effects on disease-specific scales to generic scales, such as EQ-5D, inevitably under-estimates the EQ-5D benefits as it ignores measurement error. The second paper, “Which Health-Related Quality-of-Life Outcome When Planning Randomized Trials: Disease-Specific or Generic, or Both? A Common Factor Model,” also published in Value in Health, considers whether it is best to measure EQ-5D “directly” in trials, or to measure a disease-specific outcome (such as the Hamilton Depression scale, or the Health Activities Questionnaire in rheumatoid arthritis), and then “map” the results to obtain an “indirect” estimate of the treatment effect on EQ-5D. It is often assumed that “direct” measurement of EQ-5D must be more efficient, but, in this paper, Ades and Lu show there is a trade-off. Ultimately, the choice between “direct” and “indirect” estimates will depend on trial size, uncertainty in the mapping, and the relative responsiveness of the tests. The ideal approach is to measure both, and combine the information. Interestingly, it was discovered that it can sometimes be more efficient to power a trial on the combined generic outcome than on the more responsive disease-specific measure.

Value in Health (ISSN 1098-3015) publishes papers, concepts, and ideas that advance the field of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research as well as policy papers to help health care leaders make evidence-based decisions. The journal is published bi-monthly and has over 8,000 subscribers (clinicians, decision makers, and researchers worldwide).

International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) is a nonprofit, international, educational and scientific organization that strives to increase the efficiency, effectiveness, and fairness of health care resource use to improve health.

For more information:

Related Stories

Measuring What Matters: Broadening the Scope of Health Economics Evaluation to Incorporate Well-Being

Jul 9, 2024

ISPOR announced the publication of a special themed section of research papers in Value in Health that offer insights into facets of economic evaluation aimed to incorporate well-being into decision making.

Confronting the Backlash Against QALYs: Key Insights From Leading Health Economists

Jun 18, 2024

ISPOR announced the publication of a collection of papers that examine the long-standing debate surrounding the use of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and alternative measures in healthcare decision making.

ISPOR Good Practices Report Offers Guidance for Using Real-World Data From EHRs in Health Technology Assessments

Jun 17, 2024

ISPOR announced the publication of an ISPOR Good Practices Report that proposes a framework for assessing the suitability of electronic health records data for use in health technology assessments. The report, “Assessing Real-World Data from Electronic Health Records for Health Technology Assessment: The SUITABILITY Checklist: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force” was published in the June 2024 issue of Value in Health.
Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on Update my browser now