There are three EQ-5D value sets available for use in cost effectiveness analysis in the UK and/or England:
- the UK EQ-5D-3L value set (often called the ‘MVH’ value set) which has been used for two decades, e.g. in evidence submitted to NICE (Dolan, 1997);
- a ‘crosswalk’ value set (van Hout et al., 2012), which maps patients’ EQ-5D-5L data to the EQ-5D-3L descriptive system, so that the MVH value set can be applied; and
- the EQ-5D-5L value set for England (Devlin et al., 2016).
How do these value sets differ? And how important are these differences likely to be for users?
A new OHE Research Paper by Mulhern et al. (2017) compares the characteristics of the value sets.
Just published is a new OHE Consulting Report entitled: Exploring the Assessment and Appraisal of Regenerative Medicines and Cell Therapy Products: Is the NICE Approach Fit for Purpose? The purpose of the new OHE report is to explore a review exercise undertaken by NICE and the University of York and to assess whether or not the resulting conclusions are appropriate.
A new OHE Research Paper assesses the nature of evidence used to reach HTA decisions which NICE have classified as “Recommended in Line with Clinical Practice” between 2007 and mid-2016. The level of patient access associated with these decisions has also been assessed.
A new OHE Research Paper has just been published on the topic of uncertainty and risk in health technology assessment (HTA) decision making. The report is concerned with uncertainty as it affects the cost effectiveness aspects of HTA.
ISPOR’s 19th Annual European Congress was held in Vienna, 29 October – 2 November 2016. Several members of the OHE team attended and contributed to the conference. This post contains a summary of their activity.
OHE’s Koonal Shah presented findings from his review of public preferences regarding end of life treatments at the Priorities 2016 conference in Birmingham. Martina Garau chaired a session on MCDA for priority setting in health care.