The EQ-5D-5L Valuation study in Thailand

References

• Tantivess S. Policy making and roles of health technology assessment. J Med Assoc Thai. 2008 Jun;91(Suppl 2):S88–99. PubMed PMID: 19253491.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Teerawattananon Y, Tantivess S, Yothasamut J, et al. Historical development of health technology assessment in Thailand. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009 Jul;25(Suppl 1):241–252. PubMed PMID: 19527543; eng.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohara A, Youngkong S, Velasco RP, et al. Using health technology assessment for informing coverage decisions in Thailand. J Compar Eff Resource. 2012;1(2):137–146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaikledkaew U, Teerawattananon Y. Thai national health technology assessment guidelines. Vol. 2. Nonthaburi: The graphico systems; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Thavorncharoensap M. Measurement of utility. J Med Assoc Thai. 2014 May;97(Suppl 5):S43–9. PubMed PMID: 24964698.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• EuroQol Group. EuroQol–a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990 Dec;16(3):199–208. PubMed PMID: 10109801.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier J, Jones N, Kind P. Testing the validity of the Euroqol and comparing it with the SF-36 health survey questionnaire. Qual Life Res. 1993 Jun;2(3):169–180. PubMed PMID: 8401453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson JA, Coons SJ. Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 in an adult US sample. Qual Life Res. 1998 Feb;7(2):155–166. PubMed PMID: 9523497.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan PW, Lawrence WF, Ghushchyan V. A national catalog of preference-based scores for chronic conditions in the United States. Med Care. 2005 Jul;43(7):736–749. PubMed PMID: 15970790.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badia X, Schiaffino A, Alonso J, et al. Using the EuroQoI 5-D in the Catalan general population: feasibility and construct validity. Qual Life Res. 1998 May;7(4):311–322. PubMed PMID: 9610215.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011 Apr 9. PubMed PMID: 21479777.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen MF, Birnie E, Haagsma JA, et al. Comparing the standard EQ-5D three-level system with a five-level version. Value Health. 2008 Mar-Apr;11(2):275–284. PubMed PMID: 18380640.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickard AS, De Leon MC, Kohlmann T, et al. Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Med Care. 2007 Mar;45(3):259–263. PubMed PMID: 17304084.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen MF, Pickard AS, Golicki D, et al. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study. Qual Life Res. 2013 Sep;22(7):1717–1727. PubMed PMID: 23184421; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3764313. eng.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig BM, Pickard AS, Lubetkin EI. Health problems are more common, but less severe when measured using newer EQ-5D versions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Jan;67(1):93–99. . PubMed PMID: 24075597.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devlin NJ, Shah KK, Feng Y, et al. Valuing health-related quality of life: an EQ-5D-5L value set for England. Health Econ. 2018 Jan;27(1):7–22. PubMed PMID: 28833869.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie F, Pullenayegum E, Gaebel K, et al. A Time Trade-off-derived Value Set of the EQ-5D-5L for Canada. Med Care. 2016 Jan;54(1):98–105. PubMed PMID: 26492214; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC4674140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim SH, Ahn J, Ock M, et al. The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Korea. Qual Life Res. 2016 Jul;25(7):1845–1852. 10.1007/s11136-015-1205-2. PubMed PMID: 26961008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsuchiya A, Ikeda S, Ikegami N, et al. Estimating an EQ-5D population value set: the case of Japan. Health Econ. 2002 Jun;11(4):341–353. PubMed PMID: 12007165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo N, Liu G, Li M, et al. Estimating an EQ-5D-5L Value Set for China. Value Health. 2017 Apr;20(4):662–669. PubMed PMID: 28408009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Augustovski F, Rey-Ares L, Irazola V, et al. An EQ-5D-5L value set based on Uruguayan population preferences. Qual Life Res. 2016 Feb;25(2):323–333. 10.1007/s11136-015-1086-4. PubMed PMID: 26242249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Purba FD, Hunfeld JAM, Iskandarsyah A, et al. The Indonesian EQ-5D-5L Value Set. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Nov;35(11):1153–1165. 10.1007/s40273-017-0538-9. PubMed PMID: 28695543; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC5656740.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Versteegh MM, Vermeulen KM, Evers SMAA, et al. Dutch Tariff for the Five-Level Version of EQ-5D. Value Health. 2016 Jun;19(4):343–352. PubMed PMID: 27325326.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tongsiri S, Cairns J. Estimating Population-Based Values for EQ-5D Health States in Thailand. Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):1142–1145. S1098-3015(11)01527-0 [pii]. PubMed PMID: 22152185; eng. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pattanaphesaj J, Thavorncharoensap M. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to EQ-5D-3L in the Thai diabetes patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015 Feb 6;13:14. 10.1186/s12955-014-0203-3. PubMed PMID: 25890017; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC4328309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oppe M, Devlin NJ, Van Hout B, et al. A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health. 2014 Jun;17(4):445–453. PubMed PMID: 24969006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen BM, Oppe M, Versteegh MM, et al. Introducing the composite time trade-off: a test of feasibility and face validity. Eur J Health Econ. 2013 Jul;14 Suppl 1:S5–13. PubMed PMID: 23900660.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devlin NJ, Tsuchiya A, Buckingham K, et al. A uniform time trade off method for states better and worse than dead: feasibility study of the ‘lead time’ approach. Health Econ. 2011 Mar;20(3):348–361. PubMed PMID: 21308856; eng.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramos-Goñi JM, Oppe M, Slaap B, et al. Quality Control Process for EQ-5D-5L Valuation Studies. Value Health. 2017 Mar;20(3):466–473. PubMed PMID: 28292492.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramos-Goñi JM, Rand-Hendriksen K, Pinto-Prades JL. Does the Introduction of the Ranking Task in Valuation Studies Improve Data Quality and Reduce Inconsistencies? The Case of the EQ-5D-5L. Value Health. 2016 Jun;19(4):478–486. . PubMed PMID: 27325340.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolan P, Kind P. Inconsistency and health state valuations. Soc Sci Med. 1996 Feb;42(4):609–615. PubMed PMID: 8643985.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramos-Goñi JM, Rivero-Arias O, Errea M, et al. Dealing with the health state ‘dead’ when using discrete choice experiments to obtain values for EQ-5D-5L heath states. Eur J Health Econ. 2013 Jul;14 Suppl 1:S33–42. PubMed PMID: 23900663; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3728441.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oppe M, Van Hout B Combining continuous and dichotomous responses in a hybrid model EuroQol Group Proceedings2013 [access date 2014 October 11]. Available from: http://www.euroqol.org/uploads/media/EQ2010_-_CH03_-_Oppe_-_The_optimal_hybrid_-_Experimental_design_and_modeling_of_a_combination_of_TTO_and_DCE.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ramos-Goñi JM, Craig B, Oppe M, et al. Combining continuous and dichotomous responses in a hybrid model. EuroQol Working paper series 160022016.
   Google Scholar
• Wong ELY, Ramos-Goñi JM, Cheung AWL, et al. Assessing the Use of a Feedback Module to Model EQ-5D-5L Health States Values in Hong Kong. Patient. 2018 Apr;11(2):235–247. 10.1007/s40271-017-0278-0. PubMed PMID: 29019161; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC5845074.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ludwig K, Graf Von Der Schulenburg JM, Greiner W. German Value Set for the EQ-5D-5L. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Feb 19. 10.1007/s40273-018-0615-8. PubMed PMID: 29460066.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramos-Goñi JM, Craig BM, Oppe M, et al. Handling Data Quality Issues to Estimate the Spanish EQ-5D-5L Value Set Using a Hybrid Interval Regression Approach. Value in Health. 2017 12 02. DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2017.10.023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiroiwa T, Ikeda S, Noto S, et al. Comparison of Value Set Based on DCE and/or TTO Data: scoring for EQ-5D-5L Health States in Japan. Value Health. 2016 Jul-Aug;19(5):648–654. PubMed PMID: 27565282.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolk EA, Oppe M, Scalone L, et al. Discrete choice modeling for the quantification of health states: the case of the EQ-5D. Value Health. 2010 Dec;13(8):1005–1013. PubMed PMID: 20825618.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman R, Cronin P, Viney R. A pilot discrete choice experiment to explore preferences for EQ-5D-5L health states. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2013 Jun;11(3):287–298. . PubMed PMID: 23649892.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bansback N, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A, et al. Using a discrete choice experiment to estimate health state utility values. J Health Econ. 2012 Jan;31(1):306–318. PubMed PMID: 22197308.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oppe M, Van Hout B The optimal hybrid: Experimental design and modeling of a combination of TTO and DCE. 27th scientific plenary meeting of the EuroQol group; Rotterdam2010.
   Google Scholar
• Yang Z, Van Busschbach J, Timman R, et al. Logical inconsistencies in time trade-off valuation of EQ-5D-5L health states: whose fault is it?. PLoS One. 2017;12(9):e0184883. PubMed PMID: 28934266; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC5608280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramos-Goñi JM, Pinto-Prades JL, Oppe M, et al. Valuation and Modeling of EQ-5D-5L Health States Using a Hybrid Approach. Med Care. PubMed PMID: 25521503 Dec 17 2014. DOI:10.1097/MLR.0000000000000283.
   Google Scholar