Rights statement: This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Knott, R. J., Black, N., Hollingsworth, B., and Lorgelly, P. K. (2017) Response-Scale Heterogeneity in the EQ-5D. Health Econ., 26: 387–394. doi: 10.1002/hec.3313 which has been published in final form at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hec.3313/abstract This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.
Accepted author manuscript, 569 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Response-scale heterogeneity in the EQ-5D
AU - Knott, Rachel J.
AU - Black, Nicole
AU - Hollingsworth, Bruce Philip
AU - Lorgelly, Paula K.
N1 - This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Knott, R. J., Black, N., Hollingsworth, B., and Lorgelly, P. K. (2017) Response-Scale Heterogeneity in the EQ-5D. Health Econ., 26: 387–394. doi: 10.1002/hec.3313 which has been published in final form at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hec.3313/abstract This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.
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 - EQ-5D
KW - multi-attribute utility instruments
KW - differential item functioning
KW - reporting heterogeneit
KW - response-scale heterogeneity
KW - preference heterogeneity
KW - anchoring vignettes
U2 - 10.1002/hec.3313
DO - 10.1002/hec.3313
M3 - Journal article
VL - 26
SP - 387
EP - 394
JO - Health Economics
JF - Health Economics
SN - 1057-9230
IS - 3
ER -