Do Health Preferences Differ among Asian Populations? A Comparison of EQ-5D-5L Discrete Choice Experiments Data from 11 Asian Studies.

Yang Zhihao,Purba Fredrick Dermawan,Shafie Asrul Akmal,Igarashi Ataru,Wong Eliza Lai-Yi,Lam Hilton,Van Minh Hoang,Lin Hsiang-Wen,Ahn Jeonghoon,Pattanaphesaj Juntana,Jo Min-Woo,Mai Vu Quynh,Busschbach Jan,Luo Nan,Jiang Jie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03075-x

2022-01-01

Quality of Life Research

Abstract:INTRODUCTION:Many countries have established their own EQ-5D value sets proceeding on the basis that health preferences differ among countries/populations. So far, published studies focused on comparing value set using TTO data. This study aims to compare the health preferences among 11 Asian populations using the DCE data collected in their EQ-5D-5L valuation studies.METHODS:In the EQ-VT protocol, 196 pairs of EQ-5D-5L health states were valued by a general population sample using DCE method for all studies. DCE data were obtained from the study PI. To understand how the health preferences are different/similar with each other, the following analyses were done: (1) the statistical difference between the coefficients; (2) the relative importance of the five EQ-5D dimensions; (3) the relative importance of the response levels.RESULTS:The number of statistically differed coefficients between two studies ranged from 2 to 16 (mean: 9.3), out of 20 main effects coefficients. For the relative importance, there is not a universal preference pattern that fits all studies, but with some common characteristics, e.g. mobility is considered the most important; the relative importance of levels are approximately 20% for level 2, 30% for level 3, 70% for level 4 for all studies.DISCUSSION:Following a standardized study protocol, there are still considerable differences in the modeling and relative importance results in the EQ-5D-5L DCE data among 11 Asian studies. These findings advocate the use of local value set for calculating health state utility.