The importance of accounting for parameter uncertainty in SF-6D value sets and its impact on studies that use the SF-6D to measure health utility

dc.contributor.authorKharroubi, Samer A.
dc.contributor.authorBeyh, Yara S.
dc.contributor.authorFattah, Esmail Abdul
dc.contributor.authorYoung, Tracey Anne
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Nutrition and Food Sciences
dc.contributor.facultyFaculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences (FAFS)
dc.contributor.institutionAmerican University of Beirut
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-24T11:19:17Z
dc.date.available2025-01-24T11:19:17Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.description.abstractBackground: The parameter uncertainty in the six-dimensional health state short form (SF-6D) value sets is commonly ignored. There are two sources of parameter uncertainty: uncertainty around the estimated regression coefficients and uncertainty around the model’s specification. This study explores these two sources of parameter uncertainty in the value sets using probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and a Bayesian approach. Methods: We used data from the original UK/SF-6D valuation study to evaluate the extent of parameter uncertainty in the value set. First, we re-estimated the Brazier model to replicate the published estimated coefficients. Second, we estimated standard errors around the predicted utility of each SF-6D state to assess the impact of parameter uncertainty on these estimated utilities. Third, we used Monte Carlo simulation technique to account for the uncertainty on these estimates. Finally, we used a Bayesian approach to quantifying parameter uncertainty in the value sets. The extent of parameter uncertainty in SF-6D value sets was assessed using data from the Hong Kong valuation study. Results: Including parameter uncertainty results in wider confidence/credible intervals and improved coverage probability using both approaches. Using PSA, the mean 95% confidence intervals widths for the mean utilities were 0.1394 (range: 0.0565–0.2239) and 0.0989 (0.0048–0.1252) with and without parameter uncertainty whilst, using the Bayesian approach, this was 0.1478 (0.053–0.1665). Upon evaluating the impact of parameter uncertainty on estimates of a population’s mean utility, the true standard error was underestimated by 79.1% (PSA) and 86.15% (Bayesian) when parameter uncertainty was ignored. Conclusion: Parameter uncertainty around the SF-6D value set has a large impact on the predicted utilities and estimated confidence intervals. This uncertainty should be accounted for when using SF-6D utilities in economic evaluations. Ignoring this additional information could impact misleadingly on policy decisions. © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17113949
dc.identifier.eid2-s2.0-85085975971
dc.identifier.pmid32498412
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10938/24863
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherMDPI
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectBayesian methods
dc.subjectHealth utility
dc.subjectParameter uncertainty
dc.subjectSf-6d
dc.subjectBayes theorem
dc.subjectCost-benefit analysis
dc.subjectHong kong
dc.subjectQuality of life
dc.subjectSurveys and questionnaires
dc.subjectUncertainty
dc.subjectChina
dc.subjectBayesian analysis
dc.subjectHealth survey
dc.subjectParameter estimation
dc.subjectPublic health
dc.subjectSensitivity analysis
dc.subjectUncertainty analysis
dc.subjectValuation
dc.subjectArticle
dc.subjectEconomic evaluation
dc.subjectMonte carlo method
dc.subjectProbability
dc.subjectQuantitative analysis
dc.subjectCost benefit analysis
dc.subjectHealth
dc.titleThe importance of accounting for parameter uncertainty in SF-6D value sets and its impact on studies that use the SF-6D to measure health utility
dc.typeArticle

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2020-3298.pdf
Size:
542.36 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format