Review and critical appraisal of studies mapping from quality of life or clinical measures to EQ-5D: an online database and application of the MAPS statement.

TitleReview and critical appraisal of studies mapping from quality of life or clinical measures to EQ-5D: an online database and application of the MAPS statement.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2018
AuthorsDakin H, Abel L, Burns R, Yang Y
JournalHealth and quality of life outcomes
Volume16
Issue1
Pagination31
Date Published2018 Feb 12
ISSN1477-7525
AbstractBACKGROUND: The Health Economics Research Centre (HERC) Database of Mapping Studies was established in 2013, based on a systematic review of studies developing mapping algorithms predicting EQ-5D. The Mapping onto Preference-based measures reporting Standards (MAPS) statement was published in 2015 to improve reporting of mapping studies. We aimed to update the systematic review and assess the extent to which recently-published studies mapping condition-specific quality of life or clinical measures to the EQ-5D follow the guidelines published in the MAPS Reporting Statement. METHODS: A published systematic review was updated using the original inclusion criteria to include studies published by December 2016. We included studies reporting novel algorithms mapping from any clinical measure or patient-reported quality of life measure to either the EQ-5D-3L or EQ-5D-5L. Titles and abstracts of all identified studies and the full text of papers published in 2016 were assessed against the MAPS checklist. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 144 mapping studies reporting 190 algorithms mapping from 110 different source instruments to EQ-5D. Of the 17 studies published in 2016, nine (53%) had titles that followed the MAPS statement guidance, although only two (12%) had abstracts that fully addressed all MAPS items. When the full text of these papers was assessed against the complete MAPS checklist, only two studies (12%) were found to fulfil or partly fulfil all criteria. Of the 141 papers (across all years) that included abstracts, the items on the MAPS statement checklist that were fulfilled by the largest number of studies comprised having a structured abstract (95%) and describing target instruments (91%) and source instruments (88%). CONCLUSIONS: The number of published mapping studies continues to increase. Our updated database provides a convenient way to identify mapping studies for use in cost-utility analysis. Most recent studies do not fully address all items on the MAPS checklist.
DOI10.1186/s12955-018-0857-3
Alternate JournalHealth Qual Life Outcomes