Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper considers the development and evolution of the short-form 6 dimensions (SF-6D), a generic preference-weighted measure consisting of a health classification with accompanying value set that was developed from one of the widest used health related quality of life measures, the SF-36 health survey. This enabled health state utility values to be directly generated from SF-36 and SF-12 data for a range of purposes, including to produce quality adjusted life years for use in economic evaluation of healthcare interventions across a range of different conditions and treatments. This paper considers the rationale for the development of the measure, the development process, performance and how the SF-6D has evolved since its conception. This includes the development of an updated version, SF-6D version 2 (SF-6Dv2), which was generated to deal with some criticisms of the first version, and now includes a standalone version for inclusion in studies without relying on use of SF-36 or SF-12. Valuation methods have also evolved, from standard gamble in-person interviews to online discrete choice experiment surveys. International work related to the SF-6Dv1 and SF-6Dv2 is considered. We also consider recommendations for use, highlighting key psychometric evidence and reimbursement agency recommendations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mukuria et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: