Utility Scores In Patients With Oxygen-Dependent COPD: A Case-Control Study

References

• Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL. Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118:622–629.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guyatt GH, Berman LB, Townsend M, et al. A measure of quality of life for clinical trials in chronic lung disease. Thorax 1987; 42:773–778.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones PW, Quirk FH, Baveystock CM, Littlejohns P. A self-complete measure of health status for chronic airflow limitation. The St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire. Am Rev Respir Dis 1992; 145:1321–1327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McHorney CA, Ware JE, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993; 31:247–263.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, Gilson BS. The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Med Care 1981; 19:787–805.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyle MH, Furlong W, Feeny D, et al. Reliability of the Health Utilities Index–Mark III used in the 1991 cycle 6 Canadian General Social Survey Health Questionnaire. Qual Life Res 1995; 4:249–257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan RM, Bush JW, Berry CC. Health status: types of validity and the index of well-being. Health Serv Res 1976; 11:478–507.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torrance GW. Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40:593–603.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ramsey SD, Patrick DL, Albert RK, et al. The cost-effectiveness of lung transplantation. A pilot study. University of Washington Medical Center Lung Transplant Study Group. Chest 1995; 108:1594–1601.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brauer CA, Rosen AB, Greenberg D, Neumann PJ. Trends in the measurement of health utilities in published cost-utility analyses. Value Health 2006; 9:213–218.
   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; 43:736–749.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tengs TO, Wallace A. One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Med Care 2000; 38:583–637.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nocturnal_Oxygen_Therapy_Trial_Group. Continuous or nocturnal oxygen therapy in hypoxemic chronic obstructive lung disease: a clinical trial. Nocturnal Oxygen Therapy Trial Group. Ann Intern Med 1980; 93:391–398.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourbeau J, Tan WC, Benedetti A, et al. Canadian Cohort Obstructive Lung Disease (CanCOLD): Fulfilling the need for longitudinal observational studies in COPD. COPD 2014; 11:125–132.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hopman WM, Towheed T, Anastassiades T, et al. Canadian normative data for the SF-36 health survey. Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study Research Group. CMAJ 2000; 163:265–271.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier J, Usherwood T, Harper R, Thomas K. Deriving a preference-based single index from the UK SF-36 Health Survey. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51:1115–1128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan RM. The minimally clinically important difference in generic utility-based measures. COPD 2005; 2:91–97.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Walters SJ, Brazier JE. What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003; 1:4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• GOLD. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. Global strategy for the diagnosis, management and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease –Updated 2014. (cited 2014 Aapril 3); Available from: http://www.goldcopd.org/uploads/users/files/GOLD_Report2014_Feb07.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan RM, Ries AL. Quality of life: concept and definition. COPD 2007; 4:263–271.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• O'Brien BJ, Spath M, Blackhouse G, et al. A view from the bridge: agreement between the SF-6D utility algorithm and the Health Utilities Index. Health Econ 2003; 12:975–981.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conner-Spady B, Suarez-Almazor ME. Variation in the estimation of quality-adjusted life-years by different preference-based instruments. Med Care 2003; 41:791–801.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kontodimopoulos N, Pappa E, Papadopoulos AA, et al. Comparing SF-6D and EQ-5D utilities across groups differing in health status. Qual Life Res 2009; 18:87–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szende A, Leidy NK, Stahl E, Svensson K. Estimating health utilities in patients with asthma and COPD: evidence on the performance of EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res 2009; 18:267–272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rutten-van Molken MP, Oostenbrink JB, Tashkin DP, et al. Does quality of life of COPD patients as measured by the generic EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire differentiate between COPD severity stages? Chest 2006; 130:1117–1128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asukai Y, Baldwin M, Mungapen L. Utility values for COPD patients based on the EQ-5D questionnaire from three indacaterol Phase III studies. Thorax 2012; 67 Suppl 2:A1–193.
   Google Scholar
• Scharf SM, Maimon N, Simon-Tuval T, et al. Sleep quality predicts quality of life in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2011; 6:1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Mutebi A, Brazier JE, Walters SJ. A comparison of the discriminative and evaluative properties of the SF-36 and the SF-6D index. Qual Life Res 2011; 20:1477–1486.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res 2005; 14:1523–1532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joore M, Brunenberg D, Nelemans P, et al. The impact of differences in EQ-5D and SF-6D utility scores on the acceptability of cost-utility ratios: results across five trial-based cost-utility studies. Value Health 2010; 13:222–229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montori VM, Permanyer-Miralda G, Ferreira-Gonzalez I, et al. Validity of composite end points in clinical trials. Br Med J 2005; 330:594–596.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira-Gonzalez I, Busse JW, Heels-Ansdell D, et al. Problems with use of composite end points in cardiovascular trials: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Br Med J 2007; 334:786.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar