Comparing multi-attribute utility instruments: CP-6D, a Cerebral palsy specific instrument, vs AQoL-4D

References

• Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. UK; Oxford university press; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Rowen D, Azzabi Zouraq I, Chevrou-Severac H, et al. International regulations and recommendations for utility data for health technology assessment. PharmacoEconomics. 2017;35(1):11–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Saloman J, et al. Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. UK;OXFORD University press; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Devlin NJ, Brooks R. EQ-5D and the EuroQol group: past, present and future. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2017;15(2):127–137.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herdman M, Kerr C, Pavesi M, et al. Testing the validity and responsiveness of a new cancer-specific health utility measure (FACT-8D) in relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma, and comparison to EQ-5D-5L. J Patient-reported Outcomes. 2020;4(1):22.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Reddihough D. Cerebral palsy in childhood. Aust Fam Physician. 2011;40(4):192–196.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bahrampour M, Downes M, Boyd RN, et al. Using Rasch and factor analysis to develop a Proxy-Reported health state classification (descriptive) system for cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil. 2020; 1–9. 10.1080/09638288.2019.1709565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitehead SJ, Ali S. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. Br Med Bull. 2010;96(1):5–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neumann PJ, Goldie SJ, Weinstein MC. Preference-Based measures in economic evaluation in health care. Annu Rev Public Health. 2000;21(1):587–611.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson JH G The Australian quality of life (AQOL) instrument: psychometric properties of the descriptive system and initial validation. 19th Australian Conference of Health Economists; Melbourne, Vic, Australia 1998. p. 343–346.
   Google Scholar
• Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Osborne R. The assessment of quality of life (AQoL) instrument: a psychometric measure of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res. 1999;8(3):209–224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Field A. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics.CA; Sage Publications; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Ghauri P, Grønhaug K, Strange R. Research methods in business studies. UK; Cambridge University Press; 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112(1):155–159.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier J, Roberts J, Tsuchiya A, et al., A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ. 13(9): 873–884. 2004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamers LM, Bouwmans CAM, Van Straten A, et al. Comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities in mental health patients. Health Econ. 2006;15(11):1229–1236. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson J, Ma K, Iezzi A, et al., Comparing and explaining differences in the magnitude, content, and sensitivity of utilities predicted by the EQ-5D, SF-6D, HUI 3, 15D, QWB, and AQoL-8D multiattribute utility instruments. Med Decis Mak. 35(3): 276–291. 2015. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowen D, Young T, Brazier J, et al., Comparison of generic, condition-specific, and mapped health state utility values for multiple myeloma cancer. Value Health. 15(8): 1059–1068. 2012. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mpundu-Kaambwa C, Chen G, Huynh E, et al. A review of preference-based measures for the assessment of quality of life in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy [journal article]. Quality of Life Research. 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Day N, et al. Construction and utility scaling of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument. Vic, Australia; Citeseer; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Waters E, Davis E, Mackinnon A, et al. Psychometric properties of the quality of life questionnaire for children with CP. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2007;49(1):49–55. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahrampour M, Norman R, Byrnes J, et al. Utility Values for the CP-6D, a Cerebral palsy-specific multi-attribute utility instrument, using a discrete choice experiment. The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research. 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.; 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Adams MA, Conway TL. Eta squared. In: Michalos AC, editor. Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. Vol. 2014, p. 1965–1966.
   Google Scholar
• Bansback N, Sun H, Guh DP, et al., Impact of the recall period on measuring health utilities for acute events. Health Econ. 17(12): 1413–1419. 2008. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mulhern B, Pink J, Rowen D, et al., Comparing generic and condition-specific preference-based measures in Epilepsy: EQ-5D-3L and NEWQOL-6D. Value Health. 20(4): 687–693. 2017. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kularatna S, Byrnes J, Chan YK, et al. Comparison of contemporaneous responses for EQ-5D-3L and Minnesota living with heart failure; a case for disease specific multiattribute utility instrument in cardiovascular conditions. Int J Cardiol. 2017;227:172–176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorgelly PK, Doble B, Rowen D, et al. Condition-specific or generic preference-based measures in oncology? A comparison of the EORTC-8D and the EQ-5D-3L. Qual Life Res. 2017;26(5):1163–1176. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier J, Rowen D, Mavranezouli I, et al. Developing and testing methods for deriving preference-based measures of health from condition-specific measures (and other patient-based measures of outcome). Health Technol Assess. 2012;16(32):1–114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Löwe B, Wahl I, Rose M, et al. A 4-item measure of depression and anxiety: validation and standardization of the patient health questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) in the general population. J Affect Disord. 2010;122(1):86–95. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson J, Iezzi A, Khan MA, et al. Measuring the sensitivity and construct validity of 6 utility instruments in 7 disease areas. Med Decis Mak. 2015;36(2):147–159. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawthorne G, Korn S, Richardson J. Population norms for the AQoL derived from the 2007 Australian national survey of mental health and wellbeing. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2013;37(1):7–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCallum SM, Batterham PJ, Calear AL, et al., Reductions in quality of life and increased economic burden associated with mental disorders in an Australian adult sample. Aust Health Rev. 43(6): 644–652. 2019. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar