TY - JOUR
T1 - A Direct Comparison Between Discrete Choice With Duration and Composite Time Trade-Off Methods
T2 - Do They Produce Similar Results?
AU - Roudijk, Bram
AU - Jonker, Marcel F.
AU - Bailey, Henry
AU - Pullenayegum, Eleanor
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2024
PY - 2024/6/4
Y1 - 2024/6/4
N2 - Objectives: Discrete choice experiments including a duration attribute (DCEd) represent a promising candidate method for valuing health-related quality-of-life instruments. However, it has not been established that DCEd can produce similar results as composite time trade-off (cTTO) or EuroQol Valuation Technology (EQ-VT) valuations of the EQ-5D-5L instrument. This study provides a direct comparison between cTTO and EQ-VT, and DCEd valuation methods. Methods: An EQ-VT study was conducted in Trinidad and Tobago to value the EQ-5D-5L. 1079 respondents each completed 10 cTTO tasks and 12 discrete choice experiments tasks without a duration attribute. A separate sample of 970 respondents each completed 18 split-triplet DCEd tasks. Several regression models were applied to the EQ-VT data, and the DCEd data were analyzed using mixed logit models with an exponential discount rate. The estimated values were compared using scatterplots and Bland-Altman plots. Results: The ordering of dimensions was identical in level 5 for cTTO/EQ-VT and DCEd models, with pain/discomfort being the most important dimension and usual activities being least important. cTTO/EQ-VT models produced a value for state 55555 ranging between −0.52 and −0.69, whereas this was −0.543 for the nonlinear mixed logit model for the DCEd data. Scatterplots and Bland-Altman plots suggested excellent agreement between cTTO/EQ-VT and DCEd-based estimates. Conclusions: CTTO/EQ-VT and DCEd valuations produce similar results when correcting DCEd for nonlinear time preferences. The ordering of importance of the dimensions and scale are identical, suggesting that the 2 methods measure the same construct and produce similar results.
AB - Objectives: Discrete choice experiments including a duration attribute (DCEd) represent a promising candidate method for valuing health-related quality-of-life instruments. However, it has not been established that DCEd can produce similar results as composite time trade-off (cTTO) or EuroQol Valuation Technology (EQ-VT) valuations of the EQ-5D-5L instrument. This study provides a direct comparison between cTTO and EQ-VT, and DCEd valuation methods. Methods: An EQ-VT study was conducted in Trinidad and Tobago to value the EQ-5D-5L. 1079 respondents each completed 10 cTTO tasks and 12 discrete choice experiments tasks without a duration attribute. A separate sample of 970 respondents each completed 18 split-triplet DCEd tasks. Several regression models were applied to the EQ-VT data, and the DCEd data were analyzed using mixed logit models with an exponential discount rate. The estimated values were compared using scatterplots and Bland-Altman plots. Results: The ordering of dimensions was identical in level 5 for cTTO/EQ-VT and DCEd models, with pain/discomfort being the most important dimension and usual activities being least important. cTTO/EQ-VT models produced a value for state 55555 ranging between −0.52 and −0.69, whereas this was −0.543 for the nonlinear mixed logit model for the DCEd data. Scatterplots and Bland-Altman plots suggested excellent agreement between cTTO/EQ-VT and DCEd-based estimates. Conclusions: CTTO/EQ-VT and DCEd valuations produce similar results when correcting DCEd for nonlinear time preferences. The ordering of importance of the dimensions and scale are identical, suggesting that the 2 methods measure the same construct and produce similar results.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85197817929&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jval.2024.05.016
DO - 10.1016/j.jval.2024.05.016
M3 - Article
C2 - 38843979
AN - SCOPUS:85197817929
SN - 1098-3015
VL - 27
SP - 1280
EP - 1288
JO - Value in Health
JF - Value in Health
IS - 9
ER -