182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30982403)
1. Latent Class Models Reveal Poor Agreement between Discrete-Choice and Time Tradeoff Preferences.
Pullenayegum EM; Pickard AS; Xie F
Med Decis Making; 2019 May; 39(4):421-436. PubMed ID: 30982403
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Efficient Designs for Valuation Studies That Use Time Tradeoff (TTO) Tasks to Map Latent Utilities from Discrete Choice Experiments to the Interval Scale: Selection of Health States for TTO Tasks.
Che M; Pullenayegum E
Med Decis Making; 2023 Apr; 43(3):387-396. PubMed ID: 36866604
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Using Both Time Tradeoff and Discrete Choice Experiments in Valuing the EQ-5D: Impact of Model Misspecification on Value Sets.
Waudby-Smith I; Pickard AS; Xie F; Pullenayegum EM
Med Decis Making; 2020 May; 40(4):483-497. PubMed ID: 32517541
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Test-Retest Reliability of EQ-5D-5L Valuation Techniques: The Composite Time Trade-Off and Discrete Choice Experiments.
Purba FD; Hunfeld JAM; Timman R; Iskandarsyah A; Fitriana TS; Sadarjoen SS; Passchier J; Busschbach JJV
Value Health; 2018 Oct; 21(10):1243-1249. PubMed ID: 30314626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Preparatory study for the revaluation of the EQ-5D tariff: methodology report.
Mulhern B; Bansback N; Brazier J; Buckingham K; Cairns J; Devlin N; Dolan P; Hole AR; Kavetsos G; Longworth L; Rowen D; Tsuchiya A
Health Technol Assess; 2014 Feb; 18(12):vii-xxvi, 1-191. PubMed ID: 24568945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Utility Values for Health States in Ireland: A Value Set for the EQ-5D-5L.
Hobbins A; Barry L; Kelleher D; Shah K; Devlin N; Goni JMR; O'Neill C
Pharmacoeconomics; 2018 Nov; 36(11):1345-1353. PubMed ID: 30051267
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of Value Set Based on DCE and/or TTO Data: Scoring for EQ-5D-5L Health States in Japan.
Shiroiwa T; Ikeda S; Noto S; Igarashi A; Fukuda T; Saito S; Shimozuma K
Value Health; 2016; 19(5):648-54. PubMed ID: 27565282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Accounting for Unobservable Preference Heterogeneity and Evaluating Alternative Anchoring Approaches to Estimate Country-Specific EQ-5D-Y Value Sets: A Case Study Using Spanish Preference Data.
Ramos-Goñi JM; Oppe M; Estévez-Carrillo A; Rivero-Arias O;
Value Health; 2022 May; 25(5):835-843. PubMed ID: 35500952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Valuing Health Using Time Trade-Off and Discrete Choice Experiment Methods: Does Dimension Order Impact on Health State Values?
Mulhern B; Shah K; Janssen MF; Longworth L; Ibbotson R
Value Health; 2016; 19(2):210-7. PubMed ID: 27021755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Determinants of time trade-off valuations for EQ-5D-5L health states: data from the Canadian EQ-5D-5L valuation study.
Sayah FA; Bansback N; Bryan S; Ohinmaa A; Poissant L; Pullenayegum E; Xie F; Johnson JA
Qual Life Res; 2016 Jul; 25(7):1679-85. PubMed ID: 26659899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Handling Data Quality Issues to Estimate the Spanish EQ-5D-5L Value Set Using a Hybrid Interval Regression Approach.
Ramos-Goñi JM; Craig BM; Oppe M; Ramallo-Fariña Y; Pinto-Prades JL; Luo N; Rivero-Arias O
Value Health; 2018 May; 21(5):596-604. PubMed ID: 29753358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Using the Choice Sequence in Time Trade-Off as Discrete Choices: Do the Two Stories Match?
Augestad LA; Rand K; Luo N; Barra M
Value Health; 2020 Apr; 23(4):487-494. PubMed ID: 32327166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Valuing Health State: An EQ-5D-5L Value Set for Ethiopians.
Welie AG; Gebretekle GB; Stolk E; Mukuria C; Krahn MD; Enquoselassie F; Fenta TG
Value Health Reg Issues; 2020 Sep; 22():7-14. PubMed ID: 31683254
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. New methods for modelling EQ-5D-5L value sets: An application to English data.
Feng Y; Devlin NJ; Shah KK; Mulhern B; van Hout B
Health Econ; 2018 Jan; 27(1):23-38. PubMed ID: 28833854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Small differences in EQ-5D-5L health utility scores were interpreted differently between and within respondents.
McClure NS; Xie F; Paulden M; Ohinmaa A; Johnson JA
J Clin Epidemiol; 2022 Feb; 142():133-143. PubMed ID: 34737062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Time trade-off and ranking exercises are sensitive to different dimensions of EQ-5D health states.
Rand-Hendriksen K; Augestad LA
Value Health; 2012; 15(5):777-82. PubMed ID: 22867789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. EQ-5D-5L Valuation for the Malaysian Population.
Shafie AA; Vasan Thakumar A; Lim CJ; Luo N; Rand-Hendriksen K; Md Yusof FA
Pharmacoeconomics; 2019 May; 37(5):715-725. PubMed ID: 30535779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. An EQ-5D-5L Value Set for Vietnam.
Mai VQ; Sun S; Minh HV; Luo N; Giang KB; Lindholm L; Sahlen KG
Qual Life Res; 2020 Jul; 29(7):1923-1933. PubMed ID: 32221805
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Development of an EQ-5D Value Set for India Using an Extended Design (DEVINE) Study: The Indian 5-Level Version EQ-5D Value Set.
Jyani G; Sharma A; Prinja S; Kar SS; Trivedi M; Patro BK; Goyal A; Purba FD; Finch AP; Rajsekar K; Raman S; Stolk E; Kaur M
Value Health; 2022 Jul; 25(7):1218-1226. PubMed ID: 35779943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Exploring Differences between TTO and DCE in the Valuation of Health States.
Robinson A; Spencer AE; Pinto-Prades JL; Covey JA
Med Decis Making; 2017 Apr; 37(3):273-284. PubMed ID: 27646566
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
