Three EQ-5D value sets (the EQ-5D-3L, crosswalk and EQ-5D-5L) are now available for cost utility analysis in the UK and/or England. The value sets’ characteristics differ, and it is important to systematically assess the implications of these differences for the value generated. The aim of this paper is to compare the characteristics of the three value sets. In this Research Report we analyse and compare the predicted values from each of the three value sets, and also compare EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L data from patients who completed both measures.

We find there are systematic differences in the distribution of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L value sets. The EQ-5D-5L values are higher than the EQ-5D-3L values for matched states, and the overall range, and therefore differences between adjacent states is smaller than for the EQ-5D-3L. There are similar differences between the EQ-5D-5L and crosswalk value sets. In the patient data, the EQ-5D-5L value set produces higher values across all of the conditions included, and the differences are generally significant. There is some evidence that the value sets rank different health conditions in a similar order of severity, particularly for the most and least severe conditions.

A revised version of this paper has been published in Pharmacoeconomics and can be downloaded from:

Please cite as: Mulhern, B., Feng, Y., Shah, K., Janssen, M.F., Herdman, M., van Hout, B. and Devlin, N., 2018. Comparing the UK EQ-5D-3L and English EQ-5D-5L Value Sets. Pharmacoeconomics, 36(6), pp.699-713.