Response-scale heterogeneity in the EQ-5D

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper discusses two types of response-scale heterogeneity, which may impact upon the EQ-5D. Response-scale heterogeneity in reporting occurs when individuals systematically differ in their use of response scales when responding to self-assessments. This type of heterogeneity is widely observed in relation to other self-assessed measures but is often overlooked with regard to the EQ-5D. Analogous to this, preference elicitation involving the EQ-5D could be subject to a similar type of heterogeneity, where variations across respondents may occur in the interpretations of the levels (response categories) being valued. This response-scale heterogeneity in preference elicitation may differ from variations in preferences for health states, which have been observed in the literature. This paper explores what these forms of response-scale heterogeneity may mean for the EQ-5D and the potential implications for researchers who rely on the instrument as a measure of health and quality of life. We identify situations where they are likely to be problematic and present potential avenues for overcoming these issues.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)387-394
Number of pages8
JournalHealth Economics
Volume29
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2017

Keywords

  • anchoring vignettes
  • differential item functioning
  • EQ-5D
  • multi-attribute utility instruments
  • preference heterogeneity
  • reporting heterogeneity
  • response-scale heterogeneity

Cite this

@article{374fea0982df4157a5ecc8f1508d4f6c,
title = "Response-scale heterogeneity in the EQ-5D",
abstract = "This paper discusses two types of response-scale heterogeneity, which may impact upon the EQ-5D. Response-scale heterogeneity in reporting occurs when individuals systematically differ in their use of response scales when responding to self-assessments. This type of heterogeneity is widely observed in relation to other self-assessed measures but is often overlooked with regard to the EQ-5D. Analogous to this, preference elicitation involving the EQ-5D could be subject to a similar type of heterogeneity, where variations across respondents may occur in the interpretations of the levels (response categories) being valued. This response-scale heterogeneity in preference elicitation may differ from variations in preferences for health states, which have been observed in the literature. This paper explores what these forms of response-scale heterogeneity may mean for the EQ-5D and the potential implications for researchers who rely on the instrument as a measure of health and quality of life. We identify situations where they are likely to be problematic and present potential avenues for overcoming these issues.",
keywords = "anchoring vignettes, differential item functioning, EQ-5D, multi-attribute utility instruments, preference heterogeneity, reporting heterogeneity, response-scale heterogeneity",
author = "Knott, {Rachel J.} and Nicole Black and Bruce Hollingsworth and Lorgelly, {Paula K.}",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1002/hec.3313",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "387--394",
journal = "Health Economics",
issn = "1057-9230",
publisher = "John Wiley & Sons",
number = "3",

}

Response-scale heterogeneity in the EQ-5D. / Knott, Rachel J.; Black, Nicole; Hollingsworth, Bruce; Lorgelly, Paula K.

In: Health Economics, Vol. 29, No. 3, 03.2017, p. 387-394.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response-scale heterogeneity in the EQ-5D

AU - Knott, Rachel J.

AU - Black, Nicole

AU - Hollingsworth, Bruce

AU - Lorgelly, Paula K.

PY - 2017/3

Y1 - 2017/3

N2 - This paper discusses two types of response-scale heterogeneity, which may impact upon the EQ-5D. Response-scale heterogeneity in reporting occurs when individuals systematically differ in their use of response scales when responding to self-assessments. This type of heterogeneity is widely observed in relation to other self-assessed measures but is often overlooked with regard to the EQ-5D. Analogous to this, preference elicitation involving the EQ-5D could be subject to a similar type of heterogeneity, where variations across respondents may occur in the interpretations of the levels (response categories) being valued. This response-scale heterogeneity in preference elicitation may differ from variations in preferences for health states, which have been observed in the literature. This paper explores what these forms of response-scale heterogeneity may mean for the EQ-5D and the potential implications for researchers who rely on the instrument as a measure of health and quality of life. We identify situations where they are likely to be problematic and present potential avenues for overcoming these issues.

AB - This paper discusses two types of response-scale heterogeneity, which may impact upon the EQ-5D. Response-scale heterogeneity in reporting occurs when individuals systematically differ in their use of response scales when responding to self-assessments. This type of heterogeneity is widely observed in relation to other self-assessed measures but is often overlooked with regard to the EQ-5D. Analogous to this, preference elicitation involving the EQ-5D could be subject to a similar type of heterogeneity, where variations across respondents may occur in the interpretations of the levels (response categories) being valued. This response-scale heterogeneity in preference elicitation may differ from variations in preferences for health states, which have been observed in the literature. This paper explores what these forms of response-scale heterogeneity may mean for the EQ-5D and the potential implications for researchers who rely on the instrument as a measure of health and quality of life. We identify situations where they are likely to be problematic and present potential avenues for overcoming these issues.

KW - anchoring vignettes

KW - differential item functioning

KW - EQ-5D

KW - multi-attribute utility instruments

KW - preference heterogeneity

KW - reporting heterogeneity

KW - response-scale heterogeneity

UR - https://www-scopus-com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/record/display.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84954568285&origin=resultslist&

U2 - 10.1002/hec.3313

DO - 10.1002/hec.3313

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 387

EP - 394

JO - Health Economics

JF - Health Economics

SN - 1057-9230

IS - 3

ER -