首页> 外文期刊>Medical care >Utility Scores for the Health Utilities Index Mark 2: An Empirical Assessment of Alternative Mapping Functions.
【24h】

Utility Scores for the Health Utilities Index Mark 2: An Empirical Assessment of Alternative Mapping Functions.

机译:卫生公用事业指数标记2的公用事业得分:替代制图功能的经验评估。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

INTRODUCTION:: The Health Utilities Index is one of the most widely used generic health status classification systems. The valuation algorithm rests upon a power transformation between visual analog scale (VAS) and standard gamble (SG) data. This transformation has been the subject of much debate. To date, the literature has concentrated upon the mapping functions themselves. We examine whether alternative mapping functions produce more accurate utility predictions. METHODS:: We undertook valuation interviews with 201 members of the UK general population, following the methods of the original Health Utilities Index-2 valuation survey. We estimated a cubic and a power mapping function using the mean VAS and SG data from the survey and calculated 2 alternative Multiplicative Multi Attribute Utility Functions (MAUFs). Using a validation sample, we assessed the predictive precision of the models in terms of accuracy (root mean square error and mean absolute error); clinical importance of the prediction error (% states with prediction error greater than 0.03); bias (t test); and whether the prediction error was related to the health state severity (Ljung Box Q statistic). RESULTS:: The power MAUF was an extremely poor predictive model, mean absolute error = 0.18, root mean square error = 0.206. The predictions were biased (t = -12.92). The errors were not related to the severity of the health state, (Liung Box = 10.87). The Cubic MAUF was a better predictive model than the Power MAUF (mean absolute error = 0.084, root mean square error = 0.101). The Cubic MAUF also produced biased predictions (t = -3.57). The prediction errors were not related to the severity of the health state (Liung Box = 5.242). DISCUSSION:: The Power MAUF is considerably worse than the Cubic MAUF. Our results suggest that the problems with the power function can translate into significant problems with predictive performance of the MAUF.
机译:简介::健康实用程序指数是使用最广泛的通用健康状况分类系统之一。评估算法基于视觉模拟量表(VAS)和标准赌博(SG)数据之间的幂转换。这种转变一直是许多辩论的主题。迄今为止,文献集中在映射功能本身上。我们检查替代映射功能是否会产生更准确的效用预测。方法:我们按照原始的Health Utilities Index-2评估调查的方法,对英国201个普通人群进行了评估访谈。我们使用调查中的平均VAS和SG数据估算了三次方和幂映射函数,并计算了2个备选的乘性多属性效用函数(MAUF)。使用验证样本,我们根据准确性(均方根误差和绝对绝对误差)评估了模型的预测精度;预测误差的临床重要性(预测误差大于0.03的状态百分比);偏差(t检验);以及预测错误是否与健康状况严重程度有关(Ljung Box Q统计)。结果:功效MAUF是一个非常差的预测模型,平均绝对误差= 0.18,均方根误差= 0.206。预测有偏差(t = -12.92)。错误与健康状况的严重程度无关(Liung Box = 10.87)。三次MAUF比Power MAUF是更好的预测模型(平均绝对误差= 0.084,均方根误差= 0.101)。三次MAUF也产生了偏差的预测(t = -3.57)。预测误差与健康状况的严重程度无关(Liung Box = 5.242)。讨论:: Power MAUF比立方MAUF差很多。我们的结果表明,幂函数的问题可以转化为MAUF预测性能的重大问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号