ArticleThe patient2021
QALYs for COVID-19: A Comparison of US EQ-5D-5L Value Sets.
Article in The patient, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lessons Learned from Model-based Economic Evaluations of COVID-19 Drug Treatments Under Pandemic Circumstances: Results from a Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Molnupiravir Versus Best Supportive Care for the Treatment of Outpatient COVID-19 in High-Risk Older Adults in Japan.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2025Article
- Impact of Long COVID on Health-Related Quality of Life Among COVID-19 Survivors in Saudi Arabia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Cost benefit analysis of alternative testing and quarantine policies for travelers for infection control: A case study of Singapore during the COVID-19 pandemic.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the EuroQol-5D-5L in previously hospitalized COVID-19 survivors with long COVID.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Molnupiravir Versus Best Supportive Care for the Treatment of Outpatient COVID-19 in Adults in the US.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Article
- Health-related quality of life and mental well-being of healthy and diseased persons in 8 countries: Does stringency of government response against early COVID-19 matter?SSM - population health · 2021Article
- A Net Benefit Approach for the Optimal Allocation of a COVID-19 Vaccine.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Article
- Using Societal Values to Inform Public Health Policy During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Role of Health Preference Research.The patient · 2021Article
- COVID-19 QALY values differ between US EQ-5D-5L value sets.PharmacoEconomics & outcomes news · 2021Article
- Health-related quality of life among COVID-19 individuals: A cross-sectional study in Tamil Nadu, India.Clinical epidemiology and global healthArticle
- Health-related quality of life and associated factors among COVID-19 individuals managed with indian traditional medicine: A cross-sectional study from south India.Clinical epidemiology and global healthArticle
- Health-Related Quality of Life Among Patients Recovered From COVID-19.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn economic evaluations, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) can serve as a unit of measurement for disease burden. Obtaining QALY values for COVID-19 presents a challenge owing to the availability of two US EQ-5D-5L value sets and the potentially asymptomatic presentation of the disease. The first value set was completed allowing for the discounting of future health outcomes while the second value set is undiscounted.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to compare the distribution of QALY values using a national survey and the two published value sets; and to estimate the association between COVID-19 outcomes and QALY losses.
methodsBetween 9 and 11 November, 2020, 1153 US adults completed the EQ-5D-5L instrument (five items and a visual analog scale) as well as self-reported their demographics, COVID-19 symptoms, and memberships to populations that are at risk of COVID-19 infection. The two US value sets were applied to the EQ-5D-5L responses to produce QALY values. We estimated the mean QALYs by visual analog scale decile and a generalized linear model of COVID-19 outcomes.
resultsThe discounted values are higher than the undiscounted values for each visual analog scale decile owing to methodological differences. Persons at increased risk, with a fever in the past day, and with one or more other symptoms have significantly greater QALY losses (p < 0.01). Overall, non-institutionalized individuals at risk of symptomatic clinical COVID-19 equal 0.68 for the 2016 value set (95% confidence interval 0.49-0.87) and 0.10 for the 2017 value set (95% confidence interval - 0.31 to 0.51) QALYs.
conclusionsMultiple studies have shown that decision makers discount future health outcomes, which increase QALY values. This study confronts the practical implications of these methodological advances for use in COVID-19 economic evaluations. Health economists will be able to use the QALY values in this study to better evaluate health interventions against COVID-19.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.