SynthesisApplied health economics and health policy2026
Deriving Health Utility Values Using Mapping Methods Among the Chinese Population: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Applied health economics and health policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mapping the NEI-VFQ-25 scores to the EQ-5D-Y-3L and CHU-9D utility values among adolescents with myopia.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesDespite an increasing number of mapping studies being conducted in China, there is an absence of a systematic reviews, which makes it difficult to inform the applications and further assess the methodological consistency, accuracy, and applicability of existing mapping studies. The objective of this review is to consolidate existing evidence, identify methodological gaps, and provide recommendations for improving mapping studies conducted among the Chinese population.
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted in 14 databases from inception to May 31, 2025 to identify studies that developed mapping algorithms to estimate health utility values, specifically among Chinese populations. A data template was applied to extract dataset information, source and target measures, mapping types (direct vs indirect), models used, goodness-of-fit indicators, validation methods, and the optimal mapping algorithms selected. Potential challenges for future related studies were further discussed.
resultsA total of 33 studies was included. Most studies (87.9%) focused on mapping disease-specific non-preference-based measures (PBMs) to generic PBMs. The studies covered a broad range of disease areas, including oncology (36.4%), musculoskeletal disorders (15.2%), metabolic diseases (15.2%), cardiovascular diseases (9.1%), and neurological conditions (6.1%). All studies used direct mapping, with the ordinary least squares model (n = 37) being used most frequently, followed by Tobit model (n = 32) and Beta model (n = 22). Eleven studies explored indirect mapping, with the Ordered Logit and Ordered Probit models being the most employed techniques. Thirty-two studies conducted internal validation, with the N-fold cross-validation being the most used method-no study conducted external validation. The sample size ranged from 133 to 3320, with a median sample size of 553. Conducted conceptual analysis was performed in 81.8% of the studies to assess the degree of overlap between the source measure and target measure; 72.7% of the studies reported the utility/score distributions, and 15.2% of studies further reported the response distributions.
conclusionThis systematic review provides insights into methodologies employed in mapping studies in China and identifies key areas for improvement. Addressing issues related to sample size, conceptual overlap, model selection, and validation methods will enhance the quality and applicability of mapping algorithms, ultimately supporting more robust cost-utility analyses in the Chinese healthcare system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40824559What 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.