Efficient Designs for Valuation Studies That Use Time Tradeoff (TTO) Tasks to Map Latent Utilities from Discrete Choice Experiments to the Interval Scale: Selection of Health States for TTO Tasks

Abstract

Background

In eliciting utilities to value multiattribute utility instruments, discrete choice experiments (DCEs) administered online are less costly than interviewer-facilitated time tradeoff (TTO) tasks. DCEs capture utilities on a latent scale and are often coupled with a small number of TTO tasks to anchor utilities to the interval scale. Given the costly nature of TTO data, design strategies that maximize value set precision per TTO response are critical.

Methods

Under simplifying assumptions, we expressed the mean square prediction error (MSE) of the final value set as a function of the number $J$ of TTO-valued health states and the variance $V_{J}$ of the states’ latent utilities. We hypothesized that even when these assumptions do not hold, the MSE 1) decreases as $V_{J}$ increases while holding $J$ fixed and 2) decreases as $J$ increases while holding $V_{J}$ fixed. We used simulation to examine whether there was empirical support for our hypotheses a) assuming an underlying linear relationship between TTO and DCE utilities and b) using published results from the Dutch, US, and Indonesian EQ-5D-5L valuation studies.

Results

Simulation set (a) supported the hypotheses, as did simulations parameterized using valuation data from Indonesia, which showed a linear relationship between TTO and DCE utilities. The US and Dutch valuation data showed nonlinear relationships between TTO and DCE utilities and did not support the hypotheses. Specifically, for fixed $J$ , smaller values of $V_{J}$ reduced rather than increased the MSE.

Conclusions

Given that, in practice, the underlying relationship between TTO and DCE utilities may be nonlinear, health states for TTO valuation should be placed evenly across the latent utility scale to avoid systematic bias in some regions of the scale.

Highlights

Valuation studies may feature a large number of respondents completing discrete choice tasks online, with a smaller number of respondents completing time tradeoff (TTO) tasks to anchor the discrete choice utilities to an interval scale.

We show that having each TTO respondent complete multiple tasks rather than a single task improves value set precision.

Keeping the total number of TTO respondents and the number of tasks per respondent fixed, having 20 health states directly valued through TTO leads to better predictive precision than valuing 10 health states directly.

If DCE latent utilities and TTO utilities follow a perfect linear relationship, choosing the TTO states to be valued by weighting on the 2 ends of the latent utility scale leads to better predictive precision than choosing states evenly across the latent utility scale.

Conversely, if DCE latent utilities and TTO utilities do not follow a linear relationship, choosing the states to be valued using TTO evenly across the latent utility scale leads to better predictive precision than weighted selection does.

In the context of valuation of the EQ-5D-Y-3L, we recommend valuing 20 or more health states using TTO and placing them evenly across the latent utility scale.

Keywords

cost-utility analysis EQ-5D-5L health state preference valuation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Tosh

Longworth

George

. Utility values in national institute for health and clinical excellence (nice) technology appraisals. Value Health. 2011;14(1):102–9.

Gafni

. The standard gamble method: what is being measured and how it is interpreted. Health Serv Res. 1994;29(2):207–24.

Wee

Xie

, et al. Validity, feasibility and acceptability of time trade-off and standard gamble assessments in health valuation studies: a study in a multiethnic asian population in singapore. Value Health. 2008;11:S3–10.

Bansback

Brazier

Tsuchiya

Anis

. Using a discrete choice experiment to estimate health state utility values. J Health Econ. 2012;31(1):306–18.

Norman

Cronin

Viney

King

Street

Ratcliffe

. International comparisons in valuing EQ-5D health states: a review and analysis. Value Health. 2009;12(8):1194–200.

Stolk

Ludwig

Rand

van Hout

Ramos-Goñi

. Overview, update, and lessons learned from the international EQ-5D-5L valuation work: version 2 of the EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health. 2019;22(1):23–30.

Norman

Viney

Brazier

, et al. Valuing SF-6D health states using a discrete choice experiment. Med Decis Making. 2014;34(6):773–86.

Viney

Norman

Brazier

, et al. An Australian discrete choice experiment to value EQ-5D health states. Health Econ. 2014;23(6):729–42.

Brazier

Rowen

Yang

Tsuchiya

. Comparison of health state utility values derived using time trade-off, rank and discrete choice data anchored on the full health-dead scale. Eur J Health Econ. 2012;13(5):575–87.

10.

Devlin

Shah

Mulhern

Pantiri

van Hout

. A new method for valuing health: directly eliciting personal utility functions. Eur J Health Econ. 2019;20(2):257–70.

11.

Shah

Ramos-Goñi

Kreimeier

Devlin

. An exploration of methods for obtaining 0=dead anchors for latent scale EQ-5D-Y values. Eur J Health Econ. 2020;21(7):1091–103.

12.

Rowen

Brazier

Van Hout

. A comparison of methods for converting DCE values onto the full health-dead QALY scale. Med Decis Making. 2015;35(3):328–40.

13.

Prevolnik Rupel

Ogorevc

; IMPACT HTA HRQoL Group. EQ-5D-Y value set for Slovenia. Pharmacoeconomics. 2021;39(4):463–71.

14.

Shiroiwa

Ikeda

Noto

Fukuda

Stolk

. Valuation survey of EQ-5D-Y based on the international common protocol: development of a value set in japan. Med Decis Making. 2021;41(5):597–606.

15.

Yang

Brazier

Tsuchiya

Young

. Estimating a preference-based index for a 5-dimensional health state classification for asthma derived from the asthma quality of life questionnaire. Med Decis Making. 2011;31(2):281–91.

16.

Pullenayegum

Chan

Xie

. Quantifying parameter uncertainty in EQ-5D-3L value sets and its impact on studies that use the EQ-5D-3L to measure health utility: a Bayesian approach. Med Decis Making. 2016;36(2):223–33.

17.

Shams

Pullenayegum

. Reducing uncertainty in EQ-5D value sets: the role of spatial correlation. Med Decis Making. 2019;39(2):91–9.

18.

Tsuchiya

Ikeda

Ikegami

, et al. Estimating an EQ-5D population value set: the case of Japan. Health Econ. 2002;11(4):341–53.

19.

Lamers

McDonnell

Stalmeier

Krabbe

Busschbach

. The dutch tariff: results and arguments for an effective design for national EQ-5D valuation studies. Health Econ. 2006;15(10):1121–32.

20.

Devlin

Roudijk

Ludwig

. Value Sets for EQ-5D-5L: A Compendium, Comparative Review & User Guide. Cham (Switzerland): Springer; 2022.

21.

Chan

KKW

Pullenayegum

. The theoretical relationship between sample size and expected predictive precision for EQ-5D valuation studies: a mathematical exploration and simulation study. Med Decis Making. 2020;40(3):339–47.

22.

Hansen

Stavem

Rand

. Sample size and model prediction accuracy in EQ-5D-5L valuations studies: expected out-of-sample accuracy based on resampling with different sample sizes and alternative model specifications. MDM Policy Pract. 2022;7(1):1–12.

23.

Ramos-Goñi

Oppe

Slaap

Busschbach

Stolk

. Quality control process for EQ-5D-5L valuation studies. Value Health. 2017;20(3):466–73.

24.

Oppe

Van Hout

. The “Power” of Eliciting EQ-5D-5L Values: The Experimental Design of the EQ-VT. EuroQol Working Paper Series. No. 17003. Rotterdam (The Netherlands): EuroQol Research Foundation; 2017.

25.

Versteegh

Vermeulen

Evers

SMAA

de Wit

Prenger

Stolk

. Dutch tariff for the five-level version of EQ-5D. Value Health. 2016;19(4):343–52.

26.

Pickard

Law

Jiang

, et al. United States valuation of EQ-5D-5L health states using an international protocol. Value Health. 2019;22(8):931–41.

27.

Purba

Hunfeld

Iskandarsyah

, et al. The Indonesian EQ-5D-5L value set. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35(11):1153–65.

28.

Wooldridge

. Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach. Boston (MA): Cengage Learning; 2015.

29.

Fitriana

Roudijk

Purba

Busschbach

JJV

Stolk

. Estimating an EQ-5D-Y-3L value set for Indonesia by mapping the DCE onto TTO values. Pharmacoeconomics. 2022;40(Suppl 2):157–67. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-022-01210-1

30.

Pullenayegum

Pickard

Xie

. Latent class models reveal poor agreement between discrete-choice and time tradeoff preferences. Med Decis Making. 2019;39(4):421–36. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X19841592

31.

Jakubczyk

Lipman

Roudijk

, et al. Modifying the composite time trade-off method to improve its discriminatory power. Value Health. 2023;26(2):280–91. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.08.011

32.

Jonker

Donkers

de Bekker-Grob

Stolk

. Effect of level overlap and color coding on attribute non-attendance in discrete choice experiments. Value Health. 2018;21(7):767–71.

33.

Oppe

Devlin

van Hout

Krabbe

de Charro

. A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health. 2014;17(4):445–53.

34.

Ramos-Goñi

Oppe

Stolk

, et al. International valuation protocol for the EQ-5DY-3L. Pharmacoeconomics. 2020;38(7):653–63. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-020-00909-3

35.

Yang

Jiang

Wang

, et al. Estimating an EQ-5D-Y-3L value set for china. Pharmacoeconomics. 2022;40(Suppl 2):147–55. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-022-01216-9

36.

Roudijk

Sajjad

Essers

Lipman

Stalmeier

Finch

. A value set for the EQ-5D-Y-3L in the Netherlands. Pharmacoeconomics. 2022;40(Suppl 2):193–203. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-022-01192-0

37.

Devlin

Pan

Kreimeier

, et al. Valuing EQ-5D-Y: the current state of play. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2022;20:105. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-022-01998-8

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB

0.03 MB

0.33 MB

0.18 MB

0.09 MB