↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

A comparison of EuroQol 5-Dimension health-related utilities using Italian, UK, and US preference weights in a patient sample

Overview of attention for article published in ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
A comparison of EuroQol 5-Dimension health-related utilities using Italian, UK, and US preference weights in a patient sample
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, June 2016
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s98226
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adelaide Mozzi, Michela Meregaglia, Carlo Lazzaro, Valentina Tornatore, Maurizio Belfiglio, Giovanni Fattore

Abstract

Weights associated with the EuroQol 5-Dimension 3-Level (EQ-5D-3L) instrument represent preferences for health states elicited from general population's samples. Weights have not been calculated for every country; however, empirical research shows that cross-country differences exist. This empirical study aims at investigating the impact of recently developed Italian weights in comparison with UK and US scores on health-related utility calculation using a sample of patients with Crohn's disease. The study is based on a survey on health-related quality of life in patients (n=552) affected by active Crohn's disease conducted in Italy from 2012 to 2013. Utilities computed through the Italian algorithm (mean: 0.76; SD: 0.20; median: 0.81) are generally higher than US (mean: 0.69; SD: 0.22; median: 0.77) and UK (mean: 0.57; SD: 0.32; median: 0.69) utilities, except for extremely severe health states where US values outweigh the Italian ones. UK preference weights generate the highest number of negative results. All the three value distributions are left-skewed due to very low scores associated with the most serious health states (ie, three or four levels equal to 3). As expected, despite the tariff set considered, more severe disease (Harvey Bradshaw Index >16) reduces the mean conditional EQ-5D-3L index (P<0.0001). Kendall's rank correlation between EQ Visual Analog Scale score and EQ-5D-3L index is positive (P<0.0001), even though patients tend to value their health-related quality of life more when responding to EQ-5D-3L questions than on EQ Visual Analog Scale. Regardless of the tariff set considered, ordinary least-square results highlight that more severe disease (Harvey Bradshaw Index >16) reduces the mean conditional EQ-5D-3L index (P<0.0001). Results reveal remarkable differences among the three national tariff sets and especially when severe health states occur, suggesting the need for country-specific preference weights when evaluating utilities, which can be problematic since they have not been calculated for every country yet.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 18%
Other 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 5 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 8 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 June 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#399
of 531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,497
of 353,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#17
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 531 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 353,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.