4.5 Article

Preliminary findings of an investigation into the relationship between national culture and EQ-5D value sets

期刊

QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
卷 19, 期 8, 页码 1145-1154

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-010-9678-5

关键词

EQ-5D; National culture

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the growing importance of the EQ-5D descriptive system as a basis for the valuation of QALYs in cost-utility analysis, for most countries, there are no EQ-5D value sets. Researchers and policy makers wishing to use the EQ-5D descriptive system in a country for which there is no value set are advised to use one from a nearby or 'similar' population. Factors other than geographic proximity can affect the relative values of EQ-5D states. This study explores the links between national culture and EQ-5D value sets. Rank correlation analysis is used to explore relationships between the relative values of a set of EQ-5D states and dimensions of national culture. The latter are taken from Hofstede's framework which operationalizes national culture in five dimensions. For the data currently available (countries for which EQ-5D value sets and scores on dimensions of culture both exist), moderate and strong correlations were found between the culture dimension of power distance and individualism and the EQ-5D dimensions of pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Moderate correlations were also observed between the cultural dimension of masculinity and the EQ-5D dimensions of self care, usual activities and pain/discomfort. Uncertainty avoidance correlates with the EQ-5D dimension of anxiety/depression. The correlation patterns observed are generally consistent with a priori expectations based on the nature of the dimensions of culture and the EQ-5D model. This analysis demonstrates the potential of national culture in providing insight into the drivers of the relative values of EQ-5D dimensions for different countries and in informing decisions about which EQ-5D value sets to use in situations where one does not exist.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据