Joint utility estimators in substance use disorders

UNCG Author/Contributor (non-UNCG co-authors, if there are any, appear on document)
Jeremy W. Bray, Professor and Department Head (Creator)
The University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG )
Web Site:

Abstract: Background: Although co-occurring conditions are common with substance use disorders (SUDs), estimation methods for joint health state utilities have not yet been tested in this context. Objectives: To compare joint health state utility estimators in SUD to inform economic evaluation. Methods: We conducted two Internet-based surveys of US adults to collect community perspective standard gamble utilities for SUD and common co-occurring conditions. We evaluated six conditions as they occur individually and four combinations of these as they occur in tandem. We applied joint utility estimators using the six individual conditions’ utilities to compare their performance relative to the observed combination states’ utilities. We assessed performance with bias (estimated utility minus observed utility) and root mean square error (RMSE). Results: Using 3892 utilities from 1502 respondents, the minimum estimator was statistically unbiased (i.e., the 95% confidence interval included 0) for all combination states that we measured. The maximum estimator was unbiased for two states and the linear index and adjusted decrement estimators were unbiased for one state. The maximum estimator had the smallest RMSE for two combination states (back pain and prescription opioid misuse [0.0004] and injection crack and injection opioid use [0.0007]); the linear index and minimum estimators had the smallest RMSE for one combination state each. The additive and multiplicative estimators had the largest RMSE for all states. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate the usefulness of the minimum estimator in this context, and confirm the inadequacy of the additive and multiplicative estimators. Further research is needed to extend these results to other SUD states.

Additional Information

Value in Health, 20(3), 458-465.
Language: English
Date: 2017
cost-utility analysis, preferences, substance use, utility

Email this document to