Mapping the EQ-5D Index from the SF-12: US General Population Preferences in a Nationally Representative Sample
Open accessAbstract
Background Health status measures provide a numeric score representing a profile of health status across several domains, such as physical and mental health. The SF-12 and its longer form, the SF-36, are examples of generic health status measures. Although these Background. Previous mapping algorithms estimating EQ-5D index scores from the SF-12 were based on preferences from a UK community sample. However, preferences based on the general US population are most appropriate for costeffectiveness analyses done from the societal perspective in the United States. Objective. To provide a mapping algorithm for estimating EQ-5D index scores from the SF-12 based on a nationally representative sample and using preferences based on the general US population.Methods. The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) 2002 and 2000 data were used as independent derivation and validation sets to estimate the relationship between SF-12 scores and EQ-5D index scores, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and comorbidity burden. Prediction equations for end-users who only have access to SF-12 scores were derived and compared. The empirical performance of censored least absolute deviations (CLAD), Tobit, and ordinary least squares (OLS) analytic methods were compared by calculating the mean prediction error in the validation set.Results. The fully specified CLAD model resulted in the lowest mean prediction error, followed by OLS and Tobit. The CLAD prediction equation based only on SF-12 scores performed better than the fully specified OLS and Tobit models.Conclusion. The current research provides an algorithm for mapping EQ-5D index scores from the SF-12. This algorithm may provide analysts with an avenue to obtain appropriate preference-based health-related quality-of-life scores for use in cost-effectiveness analyses when only SF-12 data are available.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The follow-up studies used different injury classifications that needed to be mapped into the GBD cause and nature-of-injury categories and the follow-up studies used different patient-reported outcome measures, introducing greater uncertainty and potential bias in our estimation of disability.
“Third, the follow-up studies used different injury classifications that needed to be mapped into the GBD cause and nature-of-injury categories and the follow-up studies used different patient-reported outcome measures, introducing greater uncertainty and potential bias in our estimation of disability.”
From The global burden of injury: incidence, mortality, disability-adjusted life years and time trends from the Global Burden of Disease study 2013 (2016) · cites this paper as [56]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 249
- Authors
- Sullivan, P. W., & Ghushchyan, V.
- Affiliations
- University of Colorado Denver (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sullivan, Patrick W.
- ORCID
- Sullivan, Patrick W.
- Venue
- Medical Decision Making
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-07
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 401-409
- ISSN
- 0272-989X (ISSN-L)
- 1552-681X
- PMC
- PMC2713176
- OpenAlex
- W1967616643
- Cited by
- 249
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 71 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 19.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Medical Decision Making (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Aging (R03AG027348)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
- Keywords
- SF-12, health-related quality of life, health state mapping, Tobit model, cost-effectiveness analysis, Medical Expenditure Panel Survey
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Consumer Behavior, Female, Health Status, Health Status Indicators, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review