Abstract
Aim: Over the last years several mapping or cross-walking algorithms for deriving utilities from QLQ-C30 scores have been published. However their external predictive accuracy has not yet been systematically compared. Methods: We tested the external validity of previously published mapping algorithms to transform the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire responses to EQ-5D derived Utilities. Results: When applied to different data sets, the currently published mapping showed a large variation between algorithms of the values of the mapped utilities, a low accuracy of the mapping compared to the observed EQ-5D utilities and no consistent performance between competing algorithms. Discussion: Therefore direct mapping from QLQ-C30 profiles to EQ-5D utilities using published algorithms should be viewed cautiously.
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 callMore From: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Disclaimer: 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.
