Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
961749 | Journal of Health Economics | 2006 | 13 Pages |
Abstract
An interview study with 101 members of public compared the protocols used in valuation studies for EQ-5D (using ranking, visual analogue scale, and time trade-off), and SF-6D (using ranking and standard gamble). Respondents were given one of the two protocols and asked to value four states each from EQ-5D and SF-6D. VAS scores suggest the narrower range of SF-6D values is partly attributable to the descriptive system; TTO values for milder states were higher than SG values; and the mean value for EQ-5D pits using TTO and SF-6D pits using SG were closer than across the two original valuation studies.
Related Topics
Health Sciences
Medicine and Dentistry
Public Health and Health Policy
Authors
Aki Tsuchiya, John Brazier, Jennifer Roberts,