Dataset Information

What is the evidence for the performance of generic preference-based measures? A systematic overview of reviews.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the evidence on the validity and responsiveness of five commonly used preference-based instruments, the EQ-5D, SF-6D, HUI3, 15D and AQoL, by undertaking a review of reviews.

Methods

Four databases were investigated using a strategy refined through a highly sensitive filter for systematic reviews. References were screened and a search for grey literature was performed. Identified citations were scrutinized against pre-defined eligibility criteria and data were extracted using a customized extraction template. Evidence on known group validity, convergent validity and responsiveness was extracted and reviewed by narrative synthesis. Quality of the included reviews was assessed using a modified version of the AMSTAR checklist.

Results

Thirty reviews were included, sixteen of which were of excellent or good quality. The body of evidence, covering more than 180 studies, was heavily skewed towards EQ-5D, with significantly fewer studies investigating HUI3 and SF-6D, and very few the 15D and AQoL. There was also lack of head-to-head comparisons between GPBMs and the tests reported by the reviews were often weak. Where there was evidence, EQ-5D, SF-6D, HUI3, 15D and AQoL seemed generally valid and responsive instruments, although not for all conditions. Evidence was not consistently reported across reviews.

Conclusions

Although generally valid, EQ-5D, SF-6D and HUI3 suffer from some problems and perform inconsistently in some populations. The lack of head-to-head comparisons and the poor reporting impedes the comparative assessment of the performance of GPBMs. This highlights the need for large comparative studies designed to test instruments' performance.

SUBMITTER: Finch AP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5913394 | biostudies-literature | 2018 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

What is the evidence for the performance of generic preference-based measures? A systematic overview of reviews.

Finch Aureliano Paolo AP Brazier John Edward JE Mukuria Clara C

The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care 20170530 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the evidence on the validity and responsiveness of five commonly used preference-based instruments, the EQ-5D, SF-6D, HUI3, 15D and AQoL, by undertaking a review of reviews.<h4>Methods</h4>Four databases were investigated using a strategy refined through a highly sensitive filter for systematic reviews. References were screened and a search for grey literature was performed. Identified citations were scrutinized against pre-defined eligibility criteria and data were e ...[more]

PMID: 28560520

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo fully implement the internationally acknowledged requirements for teaching in evidence-based practice, and support the student's development of core competencies in evidence-based practice, educators at professional bachelor degree programs in healthcare need a systematic overview of evidence-based teaching and learning interventions. The purpose of this overview of systematic reviews was to summarize and synthesize the current evidence from systematic reviews on educational interventions being used by educators to teach evidence-based practice to professional bachelor-degree healthcare students and to identify the evidence-based practice-related learning outcomes used.MethodsAn overview of systematic reviews. Four databases (PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, ERIC and the Cochrane library) were searched from May 2013 to January 25th, 2024. Additional sources were checked for unpublished or ongoing systematic reviews. Eligibility criteria included systematic reviews of studies among undergraduate nursing, physiotherapist, occupational therapist, midwife, nutrition and health, and biomedical laboratory science students, evaluating educational interventions aimed at teaching evidence-based practice in classroom or clinical practice setting, or a combination. Two authors independently performed initial eligibility screening of title/abstracts. Four authors independently performed full-text screening and assessed the quality of selected systematic reviews using standardized instruments. Data was extracted and synthesized using a narrative approach.ResultsA total of 524 references were retrieved, and 6 systematic reviews (with a total of 39 primary studies) were included. Overlap between the systematic reviews was minimal. All the systematic reviews were of low methodological quality. Synthesis and analysis revealed a variety of teaching modalities and approaches. The outcomes were to some extent assessed in accordance with the Sicily group`s categories; "skills", "attitude" and "knowledge". Whereas "behaviors", "reaction to educational experience", "self-efficacy" and "benefits for the patient" were rarely used.ConclusionsTeaching evidence-based practice is widely used in undergraduate healthcare students and a variety of interventions are used and recognized. Not all categories of outcomes suggested by the Sicily group are used to evaluate outcomes of evidence-based practice teaching. There is a need for studies measuring the effect on outcomes in all the Sicily group categories, to enhance sustainability and transition of evidence-based practice competencies to the context of healthcare practice.

Project description:BackgroundAn evidence-based approach to health care is recognized internationally as a key competency for healthcare practitioners. This overview systematically evaluated and organized evidence from systematic reviews on teaching evidence-based health care (EBHC).Methods/findingsWe searched for systematic reviews evaluating interventions for teaching EBHC to health professionals compared to no intervention or different strategies. Outcomes covered EBHC knowledge, skills, attitudes, practices and health outcomes. Comprehensive searches were conducted in April 2013. Two reviewers independently selected eligible reviews, extracted data and evaluated methodological quality. We included 16 systematic reviews, published between 1993 and 2013. There was considerable overlap across reviews. We found that 171 source studies included in the reviews related to 81 separate studies, of which 37 are in more than one review. Studies used various methodologies to evaluate educational interventions of varying content, format and duration in undergraduates, interns, residents and practicing health professionals. The evidence in the reviews showed that multifaceted, clinically integrated interventions, with assessment, led to improvements in knowledge, skills and attitudes. Interventions improved critical appraisal skills and integration of results into decisions, and improved knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviour amongst practicing health professionals. Considering single interventions, EBHC knowledge and attitude were similar for lecture-based versus online teaching. Journal clubs appeared to increase clinical epidemiology and biostatistics knowledge and reading behavior, but not appraisal skills. EBHC courses improved appraisal skills and knowledge. Amongst practicing health professionals, interactive online courses with guided critical appraisal showed significant increase in knowledge and appraisal skills. A short workshop using problem-based approaches, compared to no intervention, increased knowledge but not appraisal skills.ConclusionsEBHC teaching and learning strategies should focus on implementing multifaceted, clinically integrated approaches with assessment. Future rigorous research should evaluate minimum components for multifaceted interventions, assessment of medium to long-term outcomes, and implementation of these interventions.

Project description:ObjectiveThe study attempted to evaluate the meta-analyses (MAs) of the acupuncture treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) to provide a basis for clinical decision-making.MethodsEight databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang Data, CQVIP, and CBM, were searched from database creation to December 22, 2023. The MAs of DPN treatment using acupuncture or acupuncture combined with conventional Western medicine were included. AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA 2020 helped evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of the included studies. The GRADE methodology helped assess the evidence quality of outcome indicators. Evidence mapping was performed to display evaluation results.ResultsA total of 18 MAs involving 23,240 DPN patients were included. Based on the methodological quality evaluation, four MAs were of "moderate" quality, seven had a quality grade of "low," and another seven were of "critically low" quality. The evidence quality evaluation showed that among studies of acupuncture vs. conventional Western medicine, four had an evidence quality of "moderate," 18 had an evidence quality of "low," and 17 had an evidence quality of "critically low" and that among studies of acupuncture + conventional Western medicine vs. conventional Western medicine, 12 had an evidence quality of "moderate," 29 had an evidence quality of "low," and 33 had an evidence quality of "critically low." Compared with conventional Western medicine, simple acupuncture and acupuncture + conventional Western medicine significantly improved total effective rate (TER) and nerve conduction velocity (NCV).ConclusionAcupuncture treatment of DPN significantly improves TER and NCV with proven safety. However, the MAs of the acupuncture treatment of DPN must strictly refer to relevant standards and specifications regarding methodological and reporting quality, along with the design, execution, and reporting of primary randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Project description:BackgroundThe Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and the Chronic Headache Questionnaire (CH-QLQ) measure headache-related quality of life but are not preference-based and therefore cannot be used to generate health utilities for cost-effectiveness analyses. There are currently no established algorithms for mapping between the HIT-6 or CH-QLQ and preference-based health-related quality-of-life measures for chronic headache population.MethodsWe developed algorithms for generating EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D utilities from the HIT-6 and the CHQLQ using both direct and response mapping approaches. A multi-stage model selection process was used to assess the predictive accuracy of the models. The estimated mapping algorithms were derived to generate UK tariffs and was validated using the Chronic Headache Education and Self-management Study (CHESS) trial dataset.ResultsSeveral models were developed that reasonably accurately predict health utilities in this context. The best performing model for predicting EQ-5D-5L utility scores from the HIT-6 scores was a Censored Least Absolute Deviations (CLAD) (1) model that only included the HIT-6 score as the covariate (mean squared error (MSE) 0.0550). The selected model for CH-QLQ to EQ-5D-5L was the CLAD (3) model that included CH-QLQ summary scores, age, and gender, squared terms and interaction terms as covariates (MSE 0.0583). The best performing model for predicting SF-6D utility scores from the HIT-6 scores was the CLAD (2) model that included the HIT-6 score and age and gender as covariates (MSE 0.0102). The selected model for CH-QLQ to SF-6D was the OLS (2) model that included CH-QLQ summary scores, age, and gender as covariates (MSE 0.0086).ConclusionThe developed algorithms enable the estimation of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D utilities from two headache-specific questionnaires where preference-based health-related quality of life data are missing. However, further work is needed to help define the best approach to measuring health utilities in headache studies.

Dataset Information

What is the evidence for the performance of generic preference-based measures? A systematic overview of reviews.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

What is the evidence for the performance of generic preference-based measures? A systematic overview of reviews.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets