Abstract
Background. The ICECAP-O and the ICECAP-A are validated capability well-being instruments. To be used in economic evaluations, multidimensional instruments require weighting of the distinguished well-being states. These weights are usually obtained through ex ante preference elicitation (i.e., decision utility) but could also be based on experienced utility. Objective. This article describes the development of value sets for ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A based on experienced utility and compares them with current decision utility weights. Methods. Data from 2 cross-sectional samples corresponding to the target groups of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A were used in 2 separate analyses. The utility impacts of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels were assessed through regression models using a composite measure of subjective well-being as a proxy for experienced utility. The observed utility impacts were rescaled to match the 0 to 1 range of the existing value set. Results. The calculated experienced utility values were similar to the decision utility weights for some of the ICECAP dimensions but deviated for others. The largest differences were found for weights of the ICECAP-O dimension enjoyment and the ICECAP-A dimensions attachment and autonomy. Conclusions. The results suggest a different weighting of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels if experienced utility is used instead of decision utility.
Highlights
The ICECAP-O and the ICECAP-A are validated capability well-being instruments
We reported the differences in the mean ICECAP scores applying the different tariffs and, in contrast to previous analyses for health, found that the utility levels of individuals are lower when applying experienced rather than decision utility tariffs
Our analysis showed that calculating value sets for the ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A instruments based on experienced utility using SWB data is feasible and that the obtained weights to some extent differ from the weights previously obtained based on decision utility
Summary
To be used in economic evaluations, multidimensional instruments require weighting of the distinguished well-being states. These weights are usually obtained through ex ante preference elicitation (i.e., decision utility) but could be based on experienced utility. This article describes the development of value sets for ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A based on experienced utility and compares them with current decision utility weights. The utility impacts of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels were assessed through regression models using a composite measure of subjective well-being as a proxy for experienced utility. The calculated experienced utility values were similar to the decision utility weights for some of the ICECAP dimensions but deviated for others. The results suggest a different weighting of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels if experienced utility is used instead of decision utility
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
