German Value Set for the EQ-5D-5L

Overview

Journal Pharmacoeconomics

Specialty Pharmacology

Date 2018 Feb 21

PMID 29460066

Citations 240

Authors

Kristina Ludwig

J-Matthias Graf von der Schulenburg

Wolfgang Greiner

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: The objective of this study was to develop a value set for EQ-5D-5L based on the societal preferences of the German population. As the first country to do so, the study design used the improved EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol 2.0 developed by the EuroQol Group, including a feedback module as internal validation and a quality control process that was missing in the first wave of EQ-5D-5L valuation studies.

Methods: A representative sample of the general German population (n = 1158) was interviewed using a composite time trade-off and a discrete choice experiment under close quality control. Econometric modeling was used to estimate values for all 3125 possible health states described by EQ-5D-5L. The value set was based on a hybrid model including all available information from the composite time trade-off and discrete choice experiment valuations without any exclusions due to data issues.

Results: The final German value set was constructed from a combination of a conditional logit model for the discrete choice experiment data and a censored at -1 Tobit model for the composite time trade-off data, correcting for heteroskedasticity. The value set had logically consistent parameter estimates (p < 0.001 for all coefficients). The predicted EQ-5D-5L index values ranged from -0.661 to 1.

Conclusions: This study provided values for the health states of the German version of EQ-5D-5L representing the preferences of the German population. The study successfully employed for the first time worldwide the improved protocol 2.0. The value set enables the use of the EQ-5D-5L instrument in economic evaluations and in clinical studies.

Citing Articles

A Head-On Comparison of EQ-VT- and Crosswalk-Based EQ-5D-5L Value Sets.

Bailey H, Roudijk B Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2025; .

PMID: 40069434 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-025-00954-z.

Effect of impairment on health-related quality of life in people with multiple sclerosis: association of functional systems and EQ-5D-5L index values in a cross-sectional study.

Schmidt R, Starke A, Bednarz N, Then Bergh F Qual Life Res. 2025; .

PMID: 40048023 DOI: 10.1007/s11136-025-03928-9.

Valuing health-related quality of life: an EQ-5D-5L value set for Morocco.

Azizi A, Boutib A, Achak D, Purba F, Rencz F, Saad E Qual Life Res. 2025; .

PMID: 40019677 DOI: 10.1007/s11136-025-03930-1.

Disease Awareness in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Analysis of Baseline Data From the SMART-Finder Observational Study.

Mueller C, Neusser T, Thate-Waschke I, Nowicki J, Plominski T, Griesinger R JMIR Form Res. 2025; 9:e60246.

PMID: 39964736 PMC: 11853924. DOI: 10.2196/60246.

Psychological burden, quality of life, problems, and parental concerns of single mothers with cancer: a cross-sectional comparison.

Holsteg S, Klett M, Kisic A, Horbach-Bremen R, Brune M, Dohmen M Support Care Cancer. 2025; 33(3):173.

PMID: 39932595 PMC: 11814052. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-025-09225-y.

References

Stolk E, Ludwig K, Rand K, van Hout B, Ramos-Goni J . Overview, Update, and Lessons Learned From the International EQ-5D-5L Valuation Work: Version 2 of the EQ-5D-5L Valuation Protocol. Value Health. 2019; 22(1):23-30. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.05.010. View

Devlin N, Shah K, Feng Y, Mulhern B, van Hout B . Valuing health-related quality of life: An EQ-5D-5L value set for England. Health Econ. 2017; 27(1):7-22. PMC: 6680214. DOI: 10.1002/hec.3564. View

Ramos-Goni J, Oppe M, Slaap B, Busschbach J, Stolk E . Quality Control Process for EQ-5D-5L Valuation Studies. Value Health. 2017; 20(3):466-473. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.10.012. View

Lancsar E, Louviere J . Deleting 'irrational' responses from discrete choice experiments: a case of investigating or imposing preferences?. Health Econ. 2006; 15(8):797-811. DOI: 10.1002/hec.1104. View

Janssen M, Pickard A, Golicki D, Gudex C, Niewada M, Scalone L . Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study. Qual Life Res. 2012; 22(7):1717-27. PMC: 3764313. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-012-0322-4. View

Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D . Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011; 20(10):1727-36. PMC: 3220807. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x. View

van Hout B, Janssen M, Feng Y, Kohlmann T, Busschbach J, Golicki D . Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health. 2012; 15(5):708-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008. View

Feng Y, Devlin N, Shah K, Mulhern B, van Hout B . New methods for modelling EQ-5D-5L value sets: An application to English data. Health Econ. 2017; 27(1):23-38. PMC: 5836982. DOI: 10.1002/hec.3560. View

Devlin N, Tsuchiya A, Buckingham K, Tilling C . A uniform time trade off method for states better and worse than dead: feasibility study of the 'lead time' approach. Health Econ. 2011; 20(3):348-61. DOI: 10.1002/hec.1596. View

10.

Bleichrodt H . A new explanation for the difference between time trade-off utilities and standard gamble utilities. Health Econ. 2002; 11(5):447-56. DOI: 10.1002/hec.688. View

11.

Ramos-Goni J, Pinto-Prades J, Oppe M, Cabases J, Serrano-Aguilar P, Rivero-Arias O . Valuation and Modeling of EQ-5D-5L Health States Using a Hybrid Approach. Med Care. 2014; 55(7):e51-e58. PMC: 7659432. DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000283. View

12.

Greiner W, Claes C, Busschbach J, von der Schulenburg J . Validating the EQ-5D with time trade off for the German population. Eur J Health Econ. 2009; 6(2):124-30. DOI: 10.1007/s10198-004-0264-z. View

13.

Oppe M, Rand-Hendriksen K, Shah K, Ramos-Goni J, Luo N . EuroQol Protocols for Time Trade-Off Valuation of Health Outcomes. Pharmacoeconomics. 2016; 34(10):993-1004. PMC: 5023738. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-016-0404-1. View

14.

Ludwig K, von der Schulenburg J, Greiner W . Valuation of the EQ-5D-5L with composite time trade-off for the German population - an exploratory study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017; 15(1):39. PMC: 5319015. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-017-0617-9. View

15.

Pickard A, De Leon M, Kohlmann T, Cella D, Rosenbloom S . Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Med Care. 2007; 45(3):259-63. DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000254515.63841.81. View

16.

Janssen B, Oppe M, M Versteegh M, Stolk E . Introducing the composite time trade-off: a test of feasibility and face validity. Eur J Health Econ. 2013; 14 Suppl 1:S5-13. PMC: 3728457. DOI: 10.1007/s10198-013-0503-2. View

17.

Devlin N, Krabbe P . The development of new research methods for the valuation of EQ-5D-5L. Eur J Health Econ. 2013; 14 Suppl 1:S1-3. PMC: 3728454. DOI: 10.1007/s10198-013-0502-3. View

18.

M Versteegh M, Vermeulen K, Evers S, de Wit G, Prenger R, Stolk E . Dutch Tariff for the Five-Level Version of EQ-5D. Value Health. 2016; 19(4):343-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.01.003. View

19.

Oppe M, Devlin N, van Hout B, Krabbe P, de Charro F . A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health. 2014; 17(4):445-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.04.002. View