Delineating Care Recipient Burden Constructs: Development and Validation of the CARE-2B Scale for Care Recipient Self-Perceived Burden and Proxy Assessment of Caregiver Burden.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Care Recipient Self-Perceived Burden (CR-SPB) to Caregivers is an important but overlooked aspect within the caregiver-care recipient relationship. This study aimed to 1) develop and validate the CARE-2B (Care Recipient's Two Burden) Scale, assessing both CR-SPB and their proxy assessment of caregiver burden (Proxy-CB); 2) examine whether the CR-SPB and Proxy-CB differ from caregiver burden's own assessment and other health and social care constructs. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were collected from 504 caregiver-care recipient dyads in the US using an online panel between August 2022 and February 2023. Care recipients completed the CARE-2B Scale, which includes two subscales: their self-perceived burden (CR-SPB) and their proxy assessment of caregiver burden (Proxy-CB). Care recipients also completed measures related to health, well-being: SPB-scale, EQ-5D-5L, and EQ-HWB. Caregivers completed CarerQoL and ASCOT-Carer. Psychometric analysis included exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, item response theory (IRT), and construct validity. RESULTS: CR-SPB correlated strongly with the SPB-Scale (r=0.73), while Proxy-CB correlated more strongly with caregiver-reported burden (r=0.61). Both CR-SPB and Proxy-CB items demonstrated good discrimination and information coverage in IRT analysis. EFA further supported the distinctiveness of CR-SPB and Proxy-CB, with CR-SPB items loading on a separate factor from caregiver burden and health constructs, while Proxy-CB aligned with caregiver-reported burden. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The CARE-2B Scale innovatively assesses both CR-SPB and Proxy-CB from the care recipient's perspective, providing new insights into the caregiving relationship. This dual-perspective measure has implications for enhancing care strategies for individuals with chronic conditions or disabilities and their caregivers.

Correction: Valuation of the EQ-5D-5L in Taiwan.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209344.].

Implementation of virtual academic detailing in North America: A qualitative study.

RATIONALE: The shift toward virtual academic detailing (AD) was accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: We aimed to examine the role of external, contextual, and intrinsic programme-specific factors in virtual engagement of healthcare providers (HCPs) and delivery of AD. METHODS: AD groups throughout North America were contacted to participate in semistructured interviews. An interview guide was constructed by adapting the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). A point of emphasis included strategies AD groups employed for provider engagement while implementing virtual AD programmes. Independent coders conducted qualitative analysis using the framework method. RESULTS: Fifteen AD groups from Canada (n = 3) and the United States (n = 12) participated. Technological issues and training detailers and HCPs were challenges during the transition to virtual AD visits. Restrictions on in-person activities during the pandemic created difficulties engaging HCPs and fewer AD visits. Continuing education was one strategy to incentivize participation, but credits were often not claimed by HCPs. Groups with established networks and prior experience with virtual AD leveraged connections to mitigate disruptions and continue AD visits. Other facilitators included emphasizing contemporary topics, including opioid education beyond fundamental guidelines. Virtual AD had the additional benefit of expanding geographic reach and flexible scheduling with providers. CONCLUSIONS: AD groups across North America have shifted to virtual outreach and delivery strategies. This trend toward virtual AD may aid outreach to vulnerable rural communities, improving health equity. More research is needed on the effectiveness of virtual AD and its future implications.

Understanding caregiver burden from multiple perspectives: dyadic agreement between caregiver and care recipient.

PURPOSE: Caregiver burden (CB) is typically self-assessed by caregivers. However, an emerging concept is assessment of CB by the recipients of care, i.e., the patient. The specific objectives are (1) to assess the level of agreement between care recipients' and caregivers' view on CB, across financial, physical, emotional, and social domains; (2) to explore two care recipient perspectives: their self-perceived burden (CR-SPB), and their interpretation of the caregiver's view (Proxy-CB). METHODS: Data were collected from 504 caregiver-care recipient dyads in the U.S. using an online Qualtrics panel. The survey assessed caregiver burden using CarerQol and newly developed items. The level of agreement between responses was quantified using weighted kappa (κ) coefficients for individual items and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for index/summary scores. RESULTS: The average age of caregivers was 49.2 years, and 62.7 years for care recipients. Dyads most commonly consisted of spouses/partners (34.5%); 68.3% lived together. Proxy-CB aligned more closely with caregiver's view, with moderate to substantial agreement across CB domains (from κ = 0.48 for emotional to κ = 0.66 for financial). In the same perspective, the CarerQol-7D Index showed moderate agreement (ICC = 0.58) and the summary score of CB items substantial agreement (ICC = 0.76). Care recipients generally overestimated  CB in the Proxy-CB perspective, while they underestimated it in the CR-SPB perspective. CONCLUSION: Results demonstrate there is a difference between perspectives. Strong agreement in Proxy-CB perspective suggests that care recipients can potentially substitute for caregivers depending on the domain. CR-SPB agrees less with caregivers and may provide complementary information.

OFF episode quality of life impact scale (OFFELIA): A new measure of quality of life for off episodes in Parkinson's disease.

INTRODUCTION: OFF Episodes occur in people with Parkinson's disease when their medication wears off, and motor and/or non-motor symptoms emerge. Existing measures used to assess OFF Episodes focus on the time spent in OFF Episodes through diaries or by identifying symptoms, but they are limited in their ability to capture the severity and functional impact of OFF episodes. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a new instrument, called "OFFELIA," that measures the impact of OFF episodes on the quality of life of individuals with Parkinson's disease. METHODS: Participants completed a cross-sectional questionnaire, "Impact and Communication on OFF Periods," while enrolled in the online clinical study Fox Insights. The data collected was used to develop OFFELIA. Psychometric testing was performed on 18 candidate items using classical, exploratory factor analysis, and item response theory methods. RESULTS: 569 individuals with Parkinson's disease completed the questionnaire. All items were retained for the final measure, with 17 items aggregated into two multi-item scales (functioning and psychological well-being) and one item reported separately as it did not function well with the other items (employment). Known group comparisons based on average duration, frequency and unpredictability of OFF episodes indicated that OFFELIA subscales were more sensitive than existing generic and condition-specific measures. CONCLUSION: Initial evidence supports the validity of OFFELIA, a new instrument that assesses the impact of OFF periods on daily life. This instrument can be used in assessing clinical therapeutic strategies targeting OFF episodes in Parkinson's disease.

Comparison of the EQ-HWB and EQ-HWB-S With Other Preference-Based Measures Among United States Informal Caregivers.

OBJECTIVES: Several measures have been used or developed to capture the health and well-being of caregivers, including the EQ Health and Well-being (EQ-HWB) and its short form, EQ-HWB-S. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties and construct validity of the EQ-HWB/EQ-HWB-S in a US caregiver population. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted involving 504 caregivers. Eligible participants were 18+ years old, provided unpaid care to a relative/friend aged 18+ in the past 6 months, and spent on average of at least 1 hour per week caregiving. Survey included the following measures: EQ-HWB, Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers-Carer, CarerQol, and EQ-5D-5L. Psychometric properties were assessed using response distributions, floor/ceiling effects, Spearman's correlation for convergent validity, and effect sizes (ES) for known-group validity based on caregiving situations and intensity. RESULTS: The average age of caregivers was 49.2 (SD = 15.4), with 57.5% being female. More than half (54.4%) reported high caregiving intensity, and 68.3% lived with the care recipient. The EQ-HWB-S index showed a strong positive correlation with the EQ-5D-5L (rs = 0.72), Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers (rs = 0.54), and CarerQol (rs = 0.54) indices. Notably, the EQ-HWB-S index showed the largest ES among measures in differentiating caregiving scenarios with a large ES for caregiver's general health (d = 1.00) and small ES for caregiving intensity (d = 0.39). CONCLUSIONS: Results support construct validity of EQ-HWB and EQ-HWB-S as measures for assessing health and well-being of adult informal caregivers in comparison with other validated instruments. Differing levels of known-group validity across anchors emphasize the importance of selecting appropriate measures for caregivers, depending on research question and/or intervention aims.

The Measurement Properties of the EQ-HWB and the EQ-HWB-S in Italian Population: A Comparative Study With EQ-5D-5L.

OBJECTIVES: The EQ Health and Well-being, EQ-HWB (25-item) and the EQ-HWB-S (9-item), are new generic measures of health and well-being. The purpose of this study was to examine the measurement properties of the EQ-HWB and EQ-HWB-S measures in relation to the EQ-5D-5L among the Italian general population. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from October 2020 to February 2021, followed by secondary analysis of collected data from Italian adults. This analysis included response pattern distributions, correlation strength, and known-group comparison. Known-group comparison was assessed using effect sizes (ES) across health conditions, caregiver status, and social care usage. The EQ-HWB-S index-based score was based on the UK pilot value set, whereas the Italian value set was used for scoring the EQ-5D-5L index. RESULTS: Out of the 1182 participants, 461 reported having a chronic condition, 185 identified as caregivers, and 42 were social care users. EQ-HWB items (7.5%) showed fewer ceiling effects than EQ-5D-5L items (34.7%). Strong correlations (rs > 0.5) were found between overlapping EQ-HWB and EQ-5D-5L items. EQ-HWB-S and EQ-5D-5L index scores demonstrated similar discrimination based on symptomatic chronic conditions (ES d = 0.68 vs d = 0.71), but EQ-HWB-S had slightly higher ES for social care users (ES d = 0.84 vs d = 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Initial evidence supports the validity of EQ-HWB/EQ-HWB-S because outcome measures in the Italian population. EQ-HWB-S performed comparably to EQ-5D-5L among patients and was better in differentiating social care users. A slight decrease in discriminative properties for caregivers was observed when transitioning from EQ-HWB to EQ-HWB-S.

Scoring the EQ-HWB-S: can we do it without value sets? A non-parametric item response theory analysis.

BACKGROUND: Only one pilot value set (UK) is currently available for the EQ Health and Wellbeing Instrument short version (EQ-HWB-S). As an alternative to preference-weighted scoring, we examined whether a level summary score (LSS) is appropriate for the EQ-HWB-S using Mokken scaling analyses. METHODS: Data from patients, carers and the general population collected during the developmental phase of the EQ-HWB-S in Australia, US and UK were used, noting 3 of 9 items have since undergone revision. EQ-HWB-S data fit was examined using R package Mokken scaling's monotone homogeneity model, utilizing the automated item selection procedure (AISP) as well as Loevinger's scaling coefficients for items and the scale (HS). Manifest monotonicity was assessed by examining whether the cumulative probability for responses at or above each response level did not decrease across the summary score. RESULTS: EQ-HWB-S data were available for 3340 respondents: US = 903, Australia = 514 and UK = 1923. Mean age was 50 ± 18 and 1841 (55%) were female. AISP placed all 9 items of the EQ-HWB-S on a single scale when the lower bound was set to < 0.448. Strong scalability (HS = 0.561) was found for the EQ-HWB-S as a single scale. Stronger scales were formed by separating the psychosocial items (n = 6, HS = 0.683) and physical sensation items (n = 3, HS = 0.713). No violations of monotonicity were found except for the items mobility and daily activities for the subgroups with long-term conditions and UK subjects, respectively. DISCUSSION: As EQ-HWB-S items formed a strong scale and subscales based on Mokken analysis, LSS is a promising weighting-free approach to scoring.

United States Value Set for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Eight Dimensions (FACT-8D), a Cancer-Specific Preference-Based Quality of Life Instrument.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a value set reflecting the United States (US) general population's preferences for health states described by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) eight-dimensions preference-based multi-attribute utility instrument (FACT-8D), derived from the FACT-General cancer-specific health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) questionnaire. METHODS: A US online panel was quota-sampled to achieve a general population sample representative by sex, age (≥ 18 years), race and ethnicity. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used to value health states. The valuation task involved choosing between pairs of health states (choice-sets) described by varying levels of the FACT-8D HRQL dimensions and survival (life-years). The DCE included 100 choice-sets; each respondent was randomly allocated 16 choice-sets. Data were analysed using conditional logit regression parameterized to fit the quality-adjusted life-year framework, weighted for sociodemographic variables that were non-representative of the US general population. Preference weights were calculated as the ratio of HRQL-level coefficients to the survival coefficient. RESULTS: 2562 panel members opted in, 2462 (96%) completed at least one choice-set and 2357 (92%) completed 16 choice-sets. Pain and nausea were associated with the largest utility weights, work and sleep had more moderate utility weights, and sadness, worry and support had the smallest utility weights. Within dimensions, more severe HRQL levels were generally associated with larger weights. A preference-weighting algorithm to estimate US utilities from responses to the FACT-General questionnaire was generated. The worst health state's value was -0.33. CONCLUSIONS: This value set provides US population utilities for health states defined by the FACT-8D for use in evaluating oncology treatments.

Assessing the Content Validity of Preference-Based Measures in Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the content validity of generic and condition-specific preference-based measures (PBMs) with patients treated for cancer, evaluated against 10 Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments criteria for good content validity, to best inform measurement strategies regarding the use of PBMs in oncology development programs and real-world applications. METHODS: Individual, semistructured interviews were conducted with patients who received drug treatment for cancer in the United Kingdom (n = 47) and the United States (n = 49). During the interview, patients completed 3 generic PBMs (EQ-5D-5L, EuroQol Health and Wellbeing measure-Short Form, Château Santé Base) and 2 condition-specific PBMs (Quality of Life Utility-Core 10 Dimension, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Eight Dimension [FACT-8D]). Interviews were conducted via teleconference, audio recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded using thematic and content analysis methods. RESULTS: Condition-specific measures were evaluated as having better relevancy than generic PBMs. Overall, the FACT-8D was evaluated as holding the best content validity in terms of relevancy, and the EuroQol Health and Wellbeing measure-Short Form received the most favorable evaluation of relevancy for generic PBMs. All measures demonstrated comparable comprehensiveness, with all suggested by patients to be missing concepts. The EQ-5D-5L was evaluated best in terms of comprehensibility. This was followed by the Quality of Life Utility-Core 10 Dimension and FACT-8D; both received similar evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: All measures were generally seen by patients as adequate in capturing appropriate aspects of health-related quality of life for measuring cancer outcomes, although together condition-specific measures were evaluated as having better relevancy than generic PBMs. Further health-related quality of life instrument development is encouraged, particularly with regard to the longer-term detrimental impacts of cancer and treatment side effects. Other developments could include new cancer-specific tools inclusive of conventional health items, treatment impacts, and psychological items.

A qualitative assessment of key considerations for drug checking service implementation.

BACKGROUND: With many drug-related deaths driven by potent synthetic opioids tainting the illicit drug supply, drug checking services are becoming a key harm reduction strategy. Many drug checking technologies are available, ranging from fentanyl test strips to mass spectrometry. This study aimed to identify key considerations when implementing drug checking technologies and services to support harm reduction initiatives. METHODS: Key informant interviews were conducted with harm reduction stakeholders throughout Illinois. Participants included members of existing drug checking services and recovery centers. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded by two researchers using the framework method. Findings were contextualized according to micro (client)-, meso (organization)-, and macro (policy)-level themes. RESULTS: Seven interviews were conducted with ten participants. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy was consistently identified as a technology of choice given its accuracy, range of substance detection, portability, and usability. Recommendations included the use of confirmatory testing, which can help address the limitations of technologies and provide a mechanism to train technicians. Locations of drug checking services should maximize public health outreach and leverage existing harm reduction agencies and staff with lived experience, who are critical to developing trust and rapport with clients. Criminalization and loss of privacy were major concerns for clients using drug checking services. Additional issues included the need to raise awareness of the legitimacy of services through public support from governing bodies, and funding to ensure the sustainability of drug checking services. CONCLUSIONS: This research facilitated the identification of issues and recommendations from stakeholders around key considerations for the adoption of drug checking technologies, which not only included the cost and technical specifications of instrumentation, but also broader issues such as accessibility, privacy, and well-trained personnel trusted by clients of the service. Successful implementation of drug checking services requires knowledge of local needs and capacity and an in-depth understanding of the target population.

Cost-Effectiveness of Carbidopa-Levodopa Enteral Suspension for Advanced Parkinson's Disease in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension (CLES) is indicated for the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease (aPD) with severe motor fluctuations. OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost, quality-adjusted life years (QALY), and cost-effectiveness of CLES compared to the standard-of-care (SoC) for aPD patients in the United States (US), using real-world data. METHODS: A published Markov model, comprising of 25 health states and a death state, (defined by a combination of the Hoehn and Yahr scale and waking time spent in OFF-time) was adapted to estimate the benefits for CLES versus oral SoC over a patient's lifetime in the US healthcare setting. Clinical inputs were based on a clinical trial and a registry study; utility inputs were sourced from the Adelphi-Disease Specific Programmes. RESULTS: CLES compared to SoC was associated with incremental costs ($1,031,791 vs. $1,025,180) and QALY gain (4.61 vs. 3.76), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $7711/QALY. CONCLUSION: CLES is a cost-effective treatment for aPD patients with medication resistant motor fluctuations. © 2023 AbbVie, Inc and The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Contextual factors affecting the implementation of drug checking for harm reduction: a scoping literature review from a North American perspective.

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic continues to be a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the US. In 2020, 83% of opioid-related overdose deaths were due to synthetic opioids, such as fentanyl. Drug checking services have been widely implemented as a harm reduction intervention to facilitate the identification of substances in a drug sample. There is a need to inform decision-making on drug checking technologies and service implementation. This research aims to outline contextual considerations for the implementation of a drug checking service. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted using a structured search strategy in PubMed and EMBASE. Articles were independently screened by two reviewers, and included if they were primary literature and reported on an actionable consideration(s) for drug checking services. Data elements were extracted using a standardized form, and included study design, study population, drug checking technology utilized or discussed, and main findings. RESULTS: Twenty-nine articles were selected for inclusion, and four primary areas of consideration were identified: drug checking technologies, venue of a drug checking service, legality, and privacy. Technological considerations include the need for highly accurate, quantitative results which appeal to both populations of people with drug use disorder and recreational users. Accessibility of services was identified as an important factor that may be impacted by the location, integration with other services, how the service is provided (mobile vs. fixed), and the hours of operation. Maintaining plausible deniability and building trust were seen as important facilitators to service use and engagement. Issues surrounding legality were the most frequently cited barrier by patrons, including fear of criminalization, policing, and surveillance. Patrons and stakeholders identified a need for supportive policies that offer protections. Maintaining anonymity for patrons is crucial to addressing privacy-related barriers. CONCLUSION: This review highlights the need to understand the local population and climate for drug checking to implement a drug checking service successfully. Common themes identified in the literature included considerations related to the choice of technology, the type of venue, and the impact of legality and privacy. We intend to utilize these considerations in future research to help guide discussions with US-based stakeholders.

Comparison of Preferences and Data Quality between Discrete Choice Experiments Conducted in Online and Face-to-Face Respondents.

INTRODUCTION: Discrete choice experiments (DCE) are increasingly being conducted using online panels. However, the comparability of such DCE-based preferences to traditional modes of data collection (e.g., in-person) is not well established. In this study, supervised, face-to-face DCE was compared with its unsupervised, online facsimile on face validity, respondent behavior, and modeled preferences. METHODS: Data from face-to-face and online EQ-5D-5L health state valuation studies were compared, in which each used the same experimental design and quota sampling procedure. Respondents completed 7 binary DCE tasks comparing 2 EQ-5D-5L health states presented side by side (health states A and B). Data face validity was assessed by comparing preference patterns as a function of the severity difference between 2 health states within a task. The prevalence of potentially suspicious choice patterns (i.e., all As, all Bs, and alternating As/Bs) was compared between studies. Preference data were modeled using multinomial logit regression and compared based on dimensional contribution to overall scale and importance ranking of dimension-levels. RESULTS: One thousand five Online respondents and 1,099 face-to-face screened (F2FS) respondents were included in the main comparison of DCE tasks. Online respondents reported more problems on all EQ-5D dimensions except for Mobility. The face validity of the data was similar between comparators. Online respondents had a greater prevalence of potentially suspicious DCE choice patterns ([Online]: 5.3% [F2FS] 2.9%, P = 0.005). When modeled, the relative contribution of each EQ-5D dimension differed between modes of administration. Online respondents weighed Mobility more importantly and Anxiety/Depression less importantly. DISCUSSION: Although assessments of face validity were similar between Online and F2FS, modeled preferences differed. Future analyses are needed to clarify whether differences are attributable to preference or data quality variation between modes of data collection.

Pharmacists and Naloxone: Barriers to Dispensing and Effectiveness of an Educational Outreach Program.

BACKGROUND: The Illinois Naloxone Standing Order allows community pharmacists to dispense naloxone; however, this policy initiative may be underutilized. OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to characterize naloxone dispensing barriers, overall and by pharmacy type, make recommendations that can inform future policies to improve naloxone access, and evaluate outreach initiative effectiveness from academic detailers' perspectives. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of semistructured data collected as part of an educational outreach program targeting Illinois community pharmacists in 2021. Academic detailers conducted educational outreach visits across community pharmacy settings (i.e., primary pharmacy, grocery pharmacy, or independent pharmacy) to promote standing order use and discuss barriers pharmacists face when dispensing naloxone. Following each visit, detailers recorded visit characteristics, pharmacist-identified obstacles impacting naloxone dispensing, and visit effectiveness. RESULTS: Detailers performed in-person visits at 270 (78%) of 348 targeted sites. A lower proportion of independent pharmacies (61%) routinely stock naloxone than primary (95%, P < 0.001) or grocery (98%, P < 0.001) pharmacies. Among pharmacists at independent pharmacies, 43% indicated they were highly or extremely comfortable dispensing naloxone, a significantly lower proportion than pharmacists at grocery (79%, P < 0.001) or primary (68%, P < 0.001) pharmacies. The prevalence of salient barriers to naloxone dispensing was: cost/insurance issues (primary pharmacy = 38% vs. grocery pharmacy = 36% vs. independent pharmacy = 28%, P = 0.46), stigma (36% vs. 49% vs. 16%, P < 0.05), and lack of standing order enrollment (0% vs. 0% vs. 49%, P < 0.05). On average, detailers perceived visits as less useful to pharmacists working at independent pharmacies than those at primary or grocery pharmacies. CONCLUSIONS: Over 80% of pharmacists reported facing greater than one naloxone dispensing barrier. While cost/insurance issues appear ubiquitous, patient stigma-related factors were prevalent in primary and grocery pharmacies. Although many pharmacists are comfortable dispensing naloxone under the standing order, pharmacists at independent pharmacies are less comfortable, potentially secondary to lower standing order enrollment.

Findings from a Roundtable Discussion with US Stakeholders on Valuation of the EQ-5D-Y-3L.

OBJECTIVES: The International Valuation Protocol for the valuation of the EQ-5D-Y-3L provides baseline guidance, but country-specific context is also important. This study aimed to obtain US stakeholders' input on key considerations for youth valuation in the US. METHODS: A total of 14 stakeholders representing various backgrounds were identified via the investigators' networks. A 2-h online meeting was held to discuss (1) the need for a US value set for the EQ-5D-Y-3L; (2) willingness to pay more for quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gains for children versus adults; (3) sampling strategies; (4) framing perspectives; and (5) other challenges. The session was recorded, transcribed, and summarized. RESULTS: Several stakeholders supported paying more for QALY gains for children in recognition of their potential future contributions to society, as well as to avoid potential undervaluation and promote access to innovative treatments. Concerns regarding possible double counting, lack of data to showcase long-term benefits, and dangers of paying more for certain subgroups were also expressed. Most of the stakeholders felt that adolescents could relate to a 10-year-old's perspective better than adults and were capable of self-completing valuation tasks, and thus should be directly included in the valuation study. There were concerns that adults would be inconsistent in their views about a 10-year-old, partly depending on their status as a parent. CONCLUSIONS: US stakeholders provided insights relevant to youth valuation in a US context and were open to continued dialogue with investigators. This study could be useful to investigators who are conducting youth valuation studies in different countries and seeking stakeholder input.

EQ-5D-5L measurement properties are superior to EQ-5D-3L across the continuum of health using US value sets.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the measurement properties of the US EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and -5L to -3L crosswalk value sets (3L; 5L; 5L > 3L) across the spectrum of health. METHODS: The three scoring approaches were compared in terms of range of scale, percent of worse-than-dead health states, and mean single-level transitions. Discriminative ability was compared by leveraging two cross-sectional datasets. A novel method was used to visualize and compare the responsiveness of 3L and 5L scoring approaches across EQ VAS values. RESULTS: The US 5L value set had the broadest range of scale at 1.573 (vs. 1.109 for 3L and crosswalk). The crosswalk had the smallest mean single-level transition of 0.061 (vs. 0.078 for 5L and 0.111 for 3L). The 5L value set tended to be more discriminative/greater statistical efficiency than the crosswalk (F-statistic ratio: 1.111, 95% CI 0.989-1.240) and 3L (F-statistic ratio: 1.102 95% CI 0.861-1.383) across levels of general health. The 5L was the most responsive value set between EQ VAS values of 25 and 75. CONCLUSION: These results imply greater sensitivity of the 5L to health changes and potentially lower incremental cost-utility ratios compared to the 3L.

The FACT-8D, a new cancer-specific utility algorithm based on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapies-General (FACT-G): a Canadian valuation study.

INTRODUCTION: Utility instruments are used to assess patients' health-related quality of life for cost-utility analysis (CUA). However, for cancer patients, the dimensions of generic utility instruments may not capture all the information relevant to the impact of cancer. Cancer-specific utilities provide a useful alternative. Under the auspices of the Multi-Attribute Utility in Cancer Consortium, a cancer-specific utility algorithm was derived from the FACT-G. The new FACT-8D contains eight dimensions: pain, fatigue, nausea, sleep, work, support from family/friends, sadness, and worry health will get worse. The aim of the study was to obtain a Canadian value set for the FACT-8D. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was administered to a Canadian general population online panel, quota sampled by age, sex, and province/territory of residence. Respondents provided responses to 16 choice sets. Each choice set consisted of two health states described by the FACT-8D dimensions plus an attribute representing survival duration. Sample weights were applied and the responses were analyzed using conditional logistic regression, parameterized to fit the quality-adjusted life year framework. The results were converted into utility weights by evaluating the marginal rate of substitution between each level of each FACT-8D dimension with respect to duration. RESULTS: 2228 individuals were recruited. The analysis dataset included n = 1582 individuals, who completed at least one choice set; of which, n = 1501 completed all choice sets. After constraining to ensure monotonicity in the utility function, the largest decrements were for the highest levels of pain (- 0.38), nausea (- 0.30), and problems doing work (- 0.23). The decrements of the remaining dimensions ranged from - 0.08 to - 0.18 for their highest levels. The utility of the worst possible health state was defined as - 0.65, considerably worse than dead. CONCLUSIONS: The largest impacts on utility included three generic dimensions (i.e., pain, support, and work) and nausea, a symptom caused by cancer (e.g., brain tumours, gastrointestinal tumours, malignant bowel obstruction) and by common treatments (e.g., chemotherapy, radiotherapy, opioid analgesics). This may make the FACT-8D more informative for CUA evaluating in many cancer contexts, an assertion that must now be tested empirically in head-to-head comparisons with generic utility measures.

Developing a New Generic Health and Wellbeing Measure: Psychometric Survey Results for the EQ-HWB.

OBJECTIVES: The development of measures such as the EQ-HWB (EQ Health and Wellbeing) requires selection of items. This study explored the psychometric performance of candidate items, testing their validity in patients, social carer users, and carers. METHODS: Article and online surveys that included candidate items (N = 64) were conducted in Argentina, Australia, China, Germany, United Kingdom, and the United States. Psychometric assessment on missing data, response distributions, and known group differences was undertaken. Dimensionality was explored using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Poorly fitting items were identified using information functions, and the function of each response category was assessed using category characteristic curves from item response theory (IRT) models. Differential item functioning was tested across key subgroups. RESULTS: There were 4879 respondents (Argentina = 508, Australia = 514, China = 497, Germany = 502, United Kingdom = 1955, United States = 903). Where missing data were allowed, it was low (UK article survey 2.3%; US survey 0.6%). Most items had responses distributed across all levels. Most items could discriminate between groups with known health conditions with moderate to large effect sizes. Items were less able to discriminate across carers. Factor analysis found positive and negative measurement factors alongside the constructs of interest. For most of the countries apart from China, the confirmatory factor analysis model had good fit with some minor modifications. IRT indicated that most items had well-functioning response categories but there was some evidence of differential item functioning in many items. CONCLUSIONS: Items performed well in classical psychometric testing and IRT. This large 6-country collaboration provided evidence to inform item selection for the EQ-HWB measure.