Skip to main content
Top
Published in: PharmacoEconomics 9/2019

Open Access 01-09-2019 | Original Research Article

Valuation of EQ-5D-5L Health States in Poland: the First EQ-VT-Based Study in Central and Eastern Europe

Authors: Dominik Golicki, Michał Jakubczyk, Katarzyna Graczyk, Maciej Niewada

Published in: PharmacoEconomics | Issue 9/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

Cost-utility analyses are becoming increasingly important in Central and Eastern Europe. We aimed to develop a Polish utility tariff for EQ-5D-5L health states.

Methods

Face-to-face, computer-assisted interviews were collected in a representative sample. Each respondent followed a standardised protocol to collect ten composite time trade-off and seven discrete choice experiment observations. In the Bayesian approach, several model specifications were compared based on model fit, the usability of the final value set and how they reflect the elicitation procedure (e.g. censoring). A hybrid approach (using composite time trade-off and discrete choice experiment data) was employed in the final set, which was compared with the existing ones: EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L cross-walk.

Results

Data from 1252 respondents (11,480 composite time trade-off valuations and 8764 discrete choice experiment pairs) were collected over the period June to October 2016. The final model accounted for random parameters, error scaling with fat tails, censoring at − 1, unwillingness to trade in time trade-off by the religious people and Cauchy distribution in discrete choice experiments. Pain/discomfort impacts the utility most: the disutility equals 0.575 when at level 5. In the value set, 4.4% of EQ-5D-5L states are worse than dead. The new value set has a comparable range (minimum of − 0.590 compared to − 0.523) and the same ordering of the first three dimensions (pain/discomfort, mobility, self-care) as the EQ-5D-3L value set and the EQ-5D-5L cross-walk value set. Moreover, it is more sensitive to a moderate decline in health.

Conclusions

The new value set supports consistency with past decisions in cost-utility studies, while offering a better assessment of even moderate improvements in health. It could represent an option for Central and Eastern Europe countries lacking their own value sets.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Dimova A, Rohova M, Atanasova E, Kawalec P, Czok K. Drug policy in Bulgaria. Value Health Reg Issues. 2017;13:50–4.CrossRefPubMed Dimova A, Rohova M, Atanasova E, Kawalec P, Czok K. Drug policy in Bulgaria. Value Health Reg Issues. 2017;13:50–4.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Inotai A, Csanádi M, Harsányi A, Németh B. Drug policy in Huny. Value Health Reg Issues. 2017;13:16–22.CrossRefPubMed Inotai A, Csanádi M, Harsányi A, Németh B. Drug policy in Huny. Value Health Reg Issues. 2017;13:16–22.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Culig J, Antolic S, Szkultecka-Dębek M. Drug policy in Croatia. Value Health Reg Issues. 2017;13:27–30.CrossRefPubMed Culig J, Antolic S, Szkultecka-Dębek M. Drug policy in Croatia. Value Health Reg Issues. 2017;13:27–30.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Jahnz-Różyk K, Kawalec P, Malinowski K, Czok K. Drug policy in Poland. Value Health Reg Issues. 2017;13:23–6.CrossRefPubMed Jahnz-Różyk K, Kawalec P, Malinowski K, Czok K. Drug policy in Poland. Value Health Reg Issues. 2017;13:23–6.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Jakubiak-Lasocka J, Jakubczyk M. Cost-effectiveness versus cost-utility analyses: what are the motives behind using each and how do their results differ? A Polish example. Value Health Reg Issues. 2014;4:66–74.CrossRefPubMed Jakubiak-Lasocka J, Jakubczyk M. Cost-effectiveness versus cost-utility analyses: what are the motives behind using each and how do their results differ? A Polish example. Value Health Reg Issues. 2014;4:66–74.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Health Technology Assessment Guidelines (Version 3.0). Warsaw: Agencja Oceny Technologii Medycznych i Taryfikacji; 2016. Health Technology Assessment Guidelines (Version 3.0). Warsaw: Agencja Oceny Technologii Medycznych i Taryfikacji; 2016.
9.
go back to reference The Euroqol Group. EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16:199–208.CrossRef The Euroqol Group. EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16:199–208.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20:1727–36.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20:1727–36.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2015. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2015.
13.
go back to reference Buchholz I, Janssen MF, Kohlmann T, Feng YS. A systematic review of studies comparing the measurement properties of the three-level and five-level versions of the EQ-5D. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018;36:645–61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Buchholz I, Janssen MF, Kohlmann T, Feng YS. A systematic review of studies comparing the measurement properties of the three-level and five-level versions of the EQ-5D. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018;36:645–61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Janssen MF, Bonsel GJ, Luo N. Is EQ-5D-5L better than EQ-5D-3L? A head-to-head comparison of descriptive systems and value sets from seven countries. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018;36:675–97.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Janssen MF, Bonsel GJ, Luo N. Is EQ-5D-5L better than EQ-5D-3L? A head-to-head comparison of descriptive systems and value sets from seven countries. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018;36:675–97.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Prevolnik Rupel V, Ogorevc M. The EQ-5D health states value set for Slovenia. Zdravstveno Varstvo. 2012;51:128–40. Prevolnik Rupel V, Ogorevc M. The EQ-5D health states value set for Slovenia. Zdravstveno Varstvo. 2012;51:128–40.
16.
go back to reference Golicki D, Jakubczyk M, Niewada M, Wrona W, Busschbach JJ. Valuation of EQ-5D health states in Poland: first TTO-based social value set in Central and Eastern Europe. Value Health. 2010;13:289–97.CrossRefPubMed Golicki D, Jakubczyk M, Niewada M, Wrona W, Busschbach JJ. Valuation of EQ-5D health states in Poland: first TTO-based social value set in Central and Eastern Europe. Value Health. 2010;13:289–97.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Janssen MF, Pickard AS, Golicki D, Gudex C, Niewada M, Scalone L, et al. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study. Qual Life Res. 2013;22:1717–27.CrossRefPubMed Janssen MF, Pickard AS, Golicki D, Gudex C, Niewada M, Scalone L, et al. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study. Qual Life Res. 2013;22:1717–27.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Golicki D, Niewada M, Karlinska A, Buczek J, Kobayashi A, Janssen MF, et al. Comparing responsiveness of the EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS in stroke patients. Qual Life Res. 2015;24:1555–63.CrossRefPubMed Golicki D, Niewada M, Karlinska A, Buczek J, Kobayashi A, Janssen MF, et al. Comparing responsiveness of the EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS in stroke patients. Qual Life Res. 2015;24:1555–63.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Golicki D, Niewada M, Buczek J, Karlinska A, Kobayashi A, Janssen MF, et al. Validity of EQ-5D-5L in stroke. Qual Life Res. 2015;24:845–50.CrossRefPubMed Golicki D, Niewada M, Buczek J, Karlinska A, Kobayashi A, Janssen MF, et al. Validity of EQ-5D-5L in stroke. Qual Life Res. 2015;24:845–50.CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
go back to reference van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng YS, Kohlmann T, Busschbach J, Golicki D, et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health. 2012;15:708–15.CrossRefPubMed van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng YS, Kohlmann T, Busschbach J, Golicki D, et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health. 2012;15:708–15.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Golicki D, Niewada M, Hout BV, Janssen MF, Pickard AS. Interim EQ-5D-5L value set for Poland: first crosswalk value set in Central and Eastern Europe. Value Health Reg Issues. 2014;4:19–23.CrossRefPubMed Golicki D, Niewada M, Hout BV, Janssen MF, Pickard AS. Interim EQ-5D-5L value set for Poland: first crosswalk value set in Central and Eastern Europe. Value Health Reg Issues. 2014;4:19–23.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Xie F, Pickard AS, Krabbe PF, Revicki D, Viney R, Devlin N, et al. A checklist for reporting valuation studies of multi-attribute utility-based instruments (CREATE). Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33:867–77.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Xie F, Pickard AS, Krabbe PF, Revicki D, Viney R, Devlin N, et al. A checklist for reporting valuation studies of multi-attribute utility-based instruments (CREATE). Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33:867–77.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Central Statistical Office. Demographic yearbook of Poland. Warsaw: Zakład Wydawnictw Statystycznych; 2015. Central Statistical Office. Demographic yearbook of Poland. Warsaw: Zakład Wydawnictw Statystycznych; 2015.
25.
go back to reference Ramos-Goni JM, Oppe M, Slaap B, Busschbach JJ, Stolk E. Quality control process for EQ-5D-5L valuation studies. Value Health. 2017;20:466–73.CrossRefPubMed Ramos-Goni JM, Oppe M, Slaap B, Busschbach JJ, Stolk E. Quality control process for EQ-5D-5L valuation studies. Value Health. 2017;20:466–73.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Janssen BM, Oppe M, Versteegh MM, Stolk EA. Introducing the composite time trade-off: a test of feasibility and face validity. Eur J Health Econ. 2013;14(Suppl. 1):S5–13.CrossRefPubMed Janssen BM, Oppe M, Versteegh MM, Stolk EA. Introducing the composite time trade-off: a test of feasibility and face validity. Eur J Health Econ. 2013;14(Suppl. 1):S5–13.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Devlin NJ, Krabbe PF. The development of new research methods for the valuation of EQ-5D-5L. Eur J Health Econ. 2013;14(Suppl. 1):S1–3.CrossRefPubMed Devlin NJ, Krabbe PF. The development of new research methods for the valuation of EQ-5D-5L. Eur J Health Econ. 2013;14(Suppl. 1):S1–3.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Oppe M, Rand-Hendriksen K, Shah K, Ramos-Goni JM, Luo N. EuroQol protocols for time trade-off valuation of health outcomes. Pharmacoeconomics. 2016;34:993–1004.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Oppe M, Rand-Hendriksen K, Shah K, Ramos-Goni JM, Luo N. EuroQol protocols for time trade-off valuation of health outcomes. Pharmacoeconomics. 2016;34:993–1004.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
go back to reference Devlin NJ, Tsuchiya A, Buckingham K, Tilling C. A uniform time trade off method for states better and worse than dead: feasibility study of the ‘lead time’ approach. Health Econ. 2011;20:348–61.CrossRefPubMed Devlin NJ, Tsuchiya A, Buckingham K, Tilling C. A uniform time trade off method for states better and worse than dead: feasibility study of the ‘lead time’ approach. Health Econ. 2011;20:348–61.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Oppe M, Devlin NJ, van Hout B, Krabbe PF, de Charro F. A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health. 2014;17:445–53.CrossRefPubMed Oppe M, Devlin NJ, van Hout B, Krabbe PF, de Charro F. A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health. 2014;17:445–53.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Stolk EA, Oppe M, Scalone L, Krabbe PF. Discrete choice modeling for the quantification of health states: the case of the EQ-5D. Value Health. 2010;13:1005–13.CrossRefPubMed Stolk EA, Oppe M, Scalone L, Krabbe PF. Discrete choice modeling for the quantification of health states: the case of the EQ-5D. Value Health. 2010;13:1005–13.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Ramos-Goni JM, Rivero-Arias O, Errea M, Stolk EA, Herdman M, Cabases JM. Dealing with the health state ‘dead’ when using discrete choice experiments to obtain values for EQ-5D-5L heath states. Eur J Health Econ. 2013;14(Suppl. 1):S33–42.CrossRefPubMed Ramos-Goni JM, Rivero-Arias O, Errea M, Stolk EA, Herdman M, Cabases JM. Dealing with the health state ‘dead’ when using discrete choice experiments to obtain values for EQ-5D-5L heath states. Eur J Health Econ. 2013;14(Suppl. 1):S33–42.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473–83.CrossRefPubMed Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473–83.CrossRefPubMed
34.
go back to reference Versteegh MM, Vermeulen KM, Evers SMAA, de Wit GA, Prenger R, Stolk EA. Dutch tariff for the five-level Version of EQ-5D. Value Health. 2016;19:343–52.CrossRef Versteegh MM, Vermeulen KM, Evers SMAA, de Wit GA, Prenger R, Stolk EA. Dutch tariff for the five-level Version of EQ-5D. Value Health. 2016;19:343–52.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Craig BM, Rand K. Choice defines QALYs: a US valuation of the EQ-5D-5L. Med Care. 2018;56:529–36.CrossRefPubMed Craig BM, Rand K. Choice defines QALYs: a US valuation of the EQ-5D-5L. Med Care. 2018;56:529–36.CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Ramos-Goni JM, Craig BM, Oppe M, Ramallo-Farina Y, Pinto-Prades JL, Luo N, et al. Handling data quality issues to estimate the Spanish EQ-5D-5L value set using a hybrid interval regression approach. Value Health. 2018;21:596–604.CrossRefPubMed Ramos-Goni JM, Craig BM, Oppe M, Ramallo-Farina Y, Pinto-Prades JL, Luo N, et al. Handling data quality issues to estimate the Spanish EQ-5D-5L value set using a hybrid interval regression approach. Value Health. 2018;21:596–604.CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Devlin NJ, Shah KK, Feng Y, Mulhern B, van Hout B. Valuing health-related quality of life: an EQ-5D-5L value set for England. Health Econ. 2018;27:7–22.CrossRefPubMed Devlin NJ, Shah KK, Feng Y, Mulhern B, van Hout B. Valuing health-related quality of life: an EQ-5D-5L value set for England. Health Econ. 2018;27:7–22.CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Purba FD, Hunfeld JAM, Iskandarsyah A, Fitriana TS, Sadarjoen SS, Ramos-Goni JM, et al. The Indonesian EQ-5D-5L value set. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35:1153–65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Purba FD, Hunfeld JAM, Iskandarsyah A, Fitriana TS, Sadarjoen SS, Ramos-Goni JM, et al. The Indonesian EQ-5D-5L value set. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35:1153–65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
go back to reference Kruschke J. Doing Bayesian data analysis: a tutorial with R, JAGS, and Stan. 2nd ed. Oxford: Academic Press; 2014. Kruschke J. Doing Bayesian data analysis: a tutorial with R, JAGS, and Stan. 2nd ed. Oxford: Academic Press; 2014.
41.
go back to reference Brooks SP, Gelman A. General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations. J Comput Graph Stat. 1997;7:434–55. Brooks SP, Gelman A. General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations. J Comput Graph Stat. 1997;7:434–55.
42.
go back to reference Jia YX, Cui FQ, Li L, Zhang DL, Zhang GM, Wang FZ, et al. Comparison between the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-5D-3L in patients with hepatitis B. Qual Life Res. 2014;23:2355–63.CrossRefPubMed Jia YX, Cui FQ, Li L, Zhang DL, Zhang GM, Wang FZ, et al. Comparison between the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-5D-3L in patients with hepatitis B. Qual Life Res. 2014;23:2355–63.CrossRefPubMed
43.
go back to reference Rand-Hendriksen K, Ramos-Goñi JM, Augestad LA, Luo N. Less is more: cross-validation testing of simplified nonlinear regression model specifications for EQ-5D-5L health state values. Value Health. 2017;20:945–52.CrossRefPubMed Rand-Hendriksen K, Ramos-Goñi JM, Augestad LA, Luo N. Less is more: cross-validation testing of simplified nonlinear regression model specifications for EQ-5D-5L health state values. Value Health. 2017;20:945–52.CrossRefPubMed
44.
go back to reference Jakubczyk M, Craig BM, Barra M, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CGM, Hartman JD, Huynh E, et al. Choice defines value: a predictive modeling competition in health preference research. Value Health. 2018;21:229–38.CrossRefPubMed Jakubczyk M, Craig BM, Barra M, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CGM, Hartman JD, Huynh E, et al. Choice defines value: a predictive modeling competition in health preference research. Value Health. 2018;21:229–38.CrossRefPubMed
45.
go back to reference Jakubczyk M, Golicki D, Niewada M. The impact of a belief in life after death on health-state preferences: true difference or artifact? Qual Life Res. 2016;25:2997–3008.CrossRefPubMed Jakubczyk M, Golicki D, Niewada M. The impact of a belief in life after death on health-state preferences: true difference or artifact? Qual Life Res. 2016;25:2997–3008.CrossRefPubMed
46.
go back to reference Bansback N, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A, Anis A. Using a discrete choice experiment to estimate health state utility values. J Health Econ. 2012;31:306–18.CrossRefPubMed Bansback N, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A, Anis A. Using a discrete choice experiment to estimate health state utility values. J Health Econ. 2012;31:306–18.CrossRefPubMed
47.
go back to reference Rand-Hendriksen K, Augestad LA, Dahl FA, Kristiansen IS, Stavem K. A shortcut to mean-based time tradeoff tariffs for the EQ-5D? Med Dec Mak. 2012;32:569–77.CrossRef Rand-Hendriksen K, Augestad LA, Dahl FA, Kristiansen IS, Stavem K. A shortcut to mean-based time tradeoff tariffs for the EQ-5D? Med Dec Mak. 2012;32:569–77.CrossRef
48.
go back to reference Hernandez Alava M, Wailoo A, Grimm S, Pudney S, Gomes M, Sadique Z, et al. EQ-5D-5L versus EQ-5D-3L: the impact on cost effectiveness in the United Kingdom. Value Health. 2018;21:49–56.CrossRefPubMed Hernandez Alava M, Wailoo A, Grimm S, Pudney S, Gomes M, Sadique Z, et al. EQ-5D-5L versus EQ-5D-3L: the impact on cost effectiveness in the United Kingdom. Value Health. 2018;21:49–56.CrossRefPubMed
50.
go back to reference Shiroiwa T, Ikeda S, Noto S, Igarashi A, Fukuda T, Saito S, et al. Comparison of value set based on DCE and/or TTO data: scoring for EQ-5D-5L health states in Japan. Value Health. 2016;19:648–54.CrossRefPubMed Shiroiwa T, Ikeda S, Noto S, Igarashi A, Fukuda T, Saito S, et al. Comparison of value set based on DCE and/or TTO data: scoring for EQ-5D-5L health states in Japan. Value Health. 2016;19:648–54.CrossRefPubMed
52.
go back to reference Augustovski F, Rey-Ares L, Irazola V, Garay OU, Gianneo O, Fernandez G, et al. An EQ-5D-5L value set based on Uruguayan population preferences. Qual Life Res. 2016;25:323–33.CrossRefPubMed Augustovski F, Rey-Ares L, Irazola V, Garay OU, Gianneo O, Fernandez G, et al. An EQ-5D-5L value set based on Uruguayan population preferences. Qual Life Res. 2016;25:323–33.CrossRefPubMed
53.
go back to reference Lam H, Purba F, Rivera A, Miguel RT, Cheng KJ. Same person, different languages, different health preferences. Discrete choice experiments (DCE) comparison from the bilinguals of the EQ-5D-5L valuation in the Philippines. In: Presented at the 35th EuroQol Group Scientific Plenary, Lisbon, 21 Sept 2018. Lam H, Purba F, Rivera A, Miguel RT, Cheng KJ. Same person, different languages, different health preferences. Discrete choice experiments (DCE) comparison from the bilinguals of the EQ-5D-5L valuation in the Philippines. In: Presented at the 35th EuroQol Group Scientific Plenary, Lisbon, 21 Sept 2018.
54.
go back to reference Luo N, Liu G, Li M, Guan H, Jin X, Rand-Hendriksen K. Estimating an EQ-5D-5L value set for China. Value Health. 2017;20:662–9.CrossRefPubMed Luo N, Liu G, Li M, Guan H, Jin X, Rand-Hendriksen K. Estimating an EQ-5D-5L value set for China. Value Health. 2017;20:662–9.CrossRefPubMed
55.
go back to reference Wong ELY, Ramos-Goni JM, Cheung AWL, Wong AYK, Rivero-Arias O. Assessing the use of a feedback module to model EQ-5D-5L health states values in Hong Kong. Patient. 2018;11:235–47.CrossRefPubMed Wong ELY, Ramos-Goni JM, Cheung AWL, Wong AYK, Rivero-Arias O. Assessing the use of a feedback module to model EQ-5D-5L health states values in Hong Kong. Patient. 2018;11:235–47.CrossRefPubMed
56.
go back to reference Kim SH, Ahn J, Ock M, Shin S, Park J, Luo N, et al. The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Korea. Qual Life Res. 2016;25:1845–52.CrossRefPubMed Kim SH, Ahn J, Ock M, Shin S, Park J, Luo N, et al. The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Korea. Qual Life Res. 2016;25:1845–52.CrossRefPubMed
57.
go back to reference Pattanaphesaj J, Thavorncharoensap M, Ramos-Goni JM, Tongsiri S, Ingsrisawang L, Teerawattananon Y. The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Thailand. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018;18:551–8.CrossRefPubMed Pattanaphesaj J, Thavorncharoensap M, Ramos-Goni JM, Tongsiri S, Ingsrisawang L, Teerawattananon Y. The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Thailand. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018;18:551–8.CrossRefPubMed
58.
go back to reference Bansback N, Hole AR, Mulhern B, Tsuchiya A. Testing a discrete choice experiment including duration to value health states for large descriptive systems: addressing design and sampling issues. Soc Sci Med. 2014;114:38–48.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bansback N, Hole AR, Mulhern B, Tsuchiya A. Testing a discrete choice experiment including duration to value health states for large descriptive systems: addressing design and sampling issues. Soc Sci Med. 2014;114:38–48.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
59.
go back to reference Mulhern B, Longworth L, Brazier J, Rowen D, Bansback N, Devlin N, et al. Binary choice health state valuation and mode of administration: head-to-head comparison of online and CAPI. Value Health. 2013;16:104–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Mulhern B, Longworth L, Brazier J, Rowen D, Bansback N, Devlin N, et al. Binary choice health state valuation and mode of administration: head-to-head comparison of online and CAPI. Value Health. 2013;16:104–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
60.
go back to reference Rencz F, Gulacsi L, Drummond M, Golicki D, Prevolnik Rupel V, Simon J, et al. EQ-5D in Central and Eastern Europe: 2000–2015. Qual Life Res. 2016;25:2693–710.CrossRefPubMed Rencz F, Gulacsi L, Drummond M, Golicki D, Prevolnik Rupel V, Simon J, et al. EQ-5D in Central and Eastern Europe: 2000–2015. Qual Life Res. 2016;25:2693–710.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Valuation of EQ-5D-5L Health States in Poland: the First EQ-VT-Based Study in Central and Eastern Europe
Authors
Dominik Golicki
Michał Jakubczyk
Katarzyna Graczyk
Maciej Niewada
Publication date
01-09-2019
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
PharmacoEconomics / Issue 9/2019
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-019-00811-7

Other articles of this Issue 9/2019

PharmacoEconomics 9/2019 Go to the issue