A comparison of methods for converting DCE values onto the full health-dead QALY scale.

Abstract

Preference elicitation techniques such as time trade-off (TTO) and standard gamble (SG) receive criticism for their complexity and difficulties of use. Ordinal techniques such as discrete choice experiment (DCE) are arguably easier to understand but generate values that are not anchored onto the full health-dead 1-0 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) scale required for use in economic evaluation. This article compares existing methods for converting modeled DCE latent values onto the full health-dead QALY scale: 1) anchoring DCE values using dead as valued in the DCE and 2) anchoring DCE values using TTO value for worst state to 2 new methods: 3) mapping DCE values onto TTO and 4) combining DCE and TTO data in a hybrid model. Models are compared using their ability to predict mean TTO health state values. We use postal DCE data (n = 263) and TTO data (n = 307) collected by interview in a general population valuation study of an asthma condition-specific measure (AQL-5D). New methods 3 and 4 using mapping and hybrid models are better able to predict mean TTO health state values (mean absolute difference [MAD], 0.052-0.084) than the anchor-based methods (MAD, 0.075-0.093) and were better able to predict mean TTO health state values even when using in their estimation a subsample of the available TTO data. These new mapping and hybrid methods have a potentially useful role for producing values on the QALY scale from data elicited using ordinal techniques such as DCE for use in economic evaluation that makes best use of the desirable properties of each elicitation technique and elicited data. Further research is encouraged.