Assessment of outcome measures for cost–utility analysis in depression: mapping depression scales onto the EQ-5D-5L

  • Gamst-Klaussen T
  • Lamu A
  • Chen G
  • et al.
19Citations
Citations of this article
30Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background Many clinical studies including mental health interventions do not use a health state utility instrument, which is essential for producing quality-adjusted life years. In the absence of such utility instrument, mapping algorithms can be applied to estimate utilities from a disease-specific instrument.Aims We aim to develop mapping algorithms from two widely used depression scales; the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21) and the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K-10), onto the most widely used health state utility instrument, the EQ-5D-5L, using eight country-specific value sets.Method A total of 917 respondents with self-reported depression were recruited to describe their health on the DASS-21 and the K-10 as well as the new five-level version of the EQ-5D, referred to as the EQ-5D-5L. Six regression models were used: ordinary least squares regression, generalised linear models, beta binomial regression, fractional logistic regression model, MM-estimation and censored least absolute deviation. Root mean square error, mean absolute error and r2 were used as model performance criteria to select the optimal mapping function for each country-specific value set.Results Fractional logistic regression model was generally preferred in predicting EQ-5D-5L utilities from both DASS-21 and K-10. The only exception was the Japanese value set, where the beta binomial regression performed best.Conclusions Mapping algorithms can adequately predict EQ-5D-5L utilities from scores on DASS-21 and K-10. This enables disease-specific data from clinical trials to be applied for estimating outcomes in terms of quality-adjusted life years for use in economic evaluations.Declaration of interest None.Copyright © The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2018.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gamst-Klaussen, T., Lamu, A. N., Chen, G., & Olsen, J. A. (2018). Assessment of outcome measures for cost–utility analysis in depression: mapping depression scales onto the EQ-5D-5L. BJPsych Open, 4(4), 160–166. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2018.21

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free