Premium
Statistical implications of utility weighted and equally weighted HRQL measures: an empirical study
Author(s) -
Wilke Caitlyn T.,
Pickard A. Simon,
Walton Surrey M.,
Moock Joern,
Kohlmann Thomas,
Lee Todd A.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
health economics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.55
H-Index - 109
eISSN - 1099-1050
pISSN - 1057-9230
DOI - 10.1002/hec.1467
Subject(s) - intraclass correlation , statistics , confidence interval , statistical significance , mathematics , reliability (semiconductor) , medicine , demography , econometrics , psychology , physical therapy , psychometrics , power (physics) , sociology , physics , quantum mechanics
The utility‐based approach to health measurement, exemplified by EQ‐5D and Health Utilities Index (HUI), has been challenged on a theoretical basis, but the statistical implications of such an approach have received little attention. To empirically investigate this issue, psychometric properties and statistical efficiency of the EQ‐5D and HUI Mark 3 (HUI3) classifiers were compared when scored using preference weighted (WPS) and equally weighted summary scores using two longitudinal datasets ( n stroke =124; n rehabilitation =264). Test–retest reliability, construct validity, responsiveness, and relative efficiency (RE) ratios (with bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals) were examined. WPS had slightly lower test–retest reliability, particularly for EQ‐5D (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.61 vs 0.72). For known‐groups comparisons, WPS had greater inferential power for both EQ‐5D and HUI3 (RE>1). No significant differences in sensitivity to change were observed for EQ‐5D [0.71 (95% CI: 0.29,1.33)≤RE≤0.96(95% CI: 0.69,1.32)] or HUI3 [0.97 (95% CI: 0.89,1.03)≤RE≤1.23 (95% CI: 0.98,1.72)]. Implications of weighted scoring will depend on whether the weights are greater or less than equal weights where patients fall along the health state classifier continuum. Because utility weights can affect the statistical properties and significance of results, the summary score selected should be appropriate to the purpose of the study and population of interest. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.