The Development of the EQ-5D-5L and its Value Sets

Nancy Devlin, Simon Pickard, Jan Busschbach, Nancy Devlin, Bram Roudijk, Kristina Ludwig, Nancy Devlin, Simon Pickard, Jan Busschbach, Nancy Devlin, Bram Roudijk, Kristina Ludwig

Excerpt

This chapter introduces the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire and its development by the EuroQol Group. The availability of the EQ-5D-5L, and the growing evidence of its pivotal role as a measurement system, generated a demand for ‘values’ to accompany it that would enable the use of EQ-5D-5L data in the estimation of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and other applications where EQ-5D-5L profile data needs to be summarised by a single number. Chapter 1 sets out the main aim of the book: to provide an accessible source of information and guidance to support users of EQ-5D-5L and its value sets. Specifically, the book aims to improve users’ understanding of how EQ-5D-5L value sets are generated using the internationally standardised EQ-VT protocol; to raise awareness of the characteristics and properties of value sets; and to inform users’ choice of which value set to select for which purpose, and how that choice may affect analysis. The chapter concludes with an overview of the content of the book.

Copyright 2022, The Author(s).

References

    1. Brazier J, Karimi M (2016) Health, health-related quality of life, and quality of life: what is the difference? Pharmacoeconomics 34(7):645–649
    1. Brooks R, on behalf of the EuroQol Group (1996) EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 37(1):53–72
    1. Buchholz I, Janssen B, Kohlman T, Feng Y-S (2018) A systematic review on studies comparing the measurement properties of the three-level and the five-level version of the EQ-5D. Pharmacoeconomics 36(6):645–661
    1. Craig BM, Pickard AS, Lubetkin EI (2014) Health problems are more common, but less severe when measured using newer EQ-5D versions. J Clin Epidemiol 67(1):93–99
    1. Devlin N, Brooks R (2017) EQ-5D and the EuroQol group: past, present and future. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 15(2):127–137
    1. Devlin N, Parkin D, Browne J (2010) Patient-reported outcome measures in the NHS: new methods for analysing and reporting EQ-5D data. Health Econ 19(8):886–905
    1. Devlin N, Brazier J, Pickard AS, Stolk E (2018) 3L, 5L, what the L? A nice conundrum. Pharmacoeconomics 36(6):637–640
    1. Devlin N, Parkin D, Janssen B (2020) Methods for analysing and reporting EQ-5D data. Springer, Cham
    1. Dolan P (1997) Modelling valuations of EuroQol health states. Med Care 35(11):1095–1108
    1. Drummond M, Sculpher M, Claxton K, Stoddart G, Torrance G (2015) Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
    1. EuroQol Research Foundation (2019) EQ-5D-5L User Guide. Version 3.0. EuroQol Research Foundation: Rotterdam. . Accessed 25 June 2021
    1. EuroQol Research Foundation (2021). . Accessed 23 July 2021
    1. Feng Y, Devlin N, Herdman M (2015) Assessing the health of the general population in England: how do the three- and five-level versions of EQ-5D compare? Health Qual Life Outcomes 13:171.
    1. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen MF, Kind P, Parkin D, Bonsel G, Badia X (2011) Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res 20(10):1727–1736
    1. Janssen M, Birnie E, Bonsel G (2008a) Quantification of the level descriptors for the standard EQ-5D three level system and a five level version according to 2 methods. Quality Life Res 17(3):463–473
    1. Janssen M, Birnie E, Haagsma J, Bonsel G (2008b) Comparing the standard EQ-5D three level system with a five level version. Value Health 11(2):275–284
    1. Janssen MF, Bonsel G, Luo N (2018) Is EQ-5D-5L better than EQ-5D-3L? A head-to-head comparison of descriptive systems and value sets from seven countries. Pharmacoeconomics 36(6):675–697
    1. Kennedy-Martin M, Slaap B, Herdman M, van Reenen M, Kennedy-Martin T, Greiner W, Busschbach J, Boye KS (2020) Which multi-attribute utility instruments are recommended for use in cost-utility analysis? A review of national health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines. Eur J Health Econ 21(8):1245–1257
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2013) Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. . Accessed 17 July 2021
    1. Oppe M, Devlin N, Black N (2011) Comparison of the underlying constructs of the EQ-5D and Oxford Hip Score: implications for mapping. Value Health 14(6):884–891
    1. Pickard AS (2015) Is it time to update societal value sets for preference-based measures of health? Pharmacoeconomics 33(3):191–192
    1. Pickard AS, Kohlmann T, Janssen M, Bonsel G, Rosenbloom S, Cella D (2007a) Evaluating equivalency between response systems: Application of the Rasch model to a 3-level and 5-level EQ-5D. Med Care 45(9):812–819
    1. Pickard AS, de Leon M, Kohlmann T, Cella D, Rosenbloom S (2007b) Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Med Care 45(3):259–263
    1. Szende A, Oppe M, Devlin N (2007) EQ-5D value sets: inventory, comparative review and user guide. Springer, Dordrecht
    1. van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng YS, Kohlmann T, Busschbach J, Golicki D, Lloyd A, Scalone L, Kind P, Pickard AS (2011) Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health 15(5):708–715

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe