Cited by 249Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeEconomic and Environmental ValuationDelphi Technique in Research

Mapping the EQ-5D Index from the SF-12: US General Population Preferences in a Nationally Representative Sample

Open access
Sullivan, Patrick W., Ghushchyan, Vahram·2006·Medical Decision Making

Abstract

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

Crossref · 10.1177/0272989x06290496

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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.”

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.
Venue
Medical Decision Making
Published
2006-07
Volume
26
Issue
4
Pages
401-409
ISSN
  • 0272-989X (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-681X
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
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