Purpose: The short form six dimensions (SF-6D) are derived from the SF-36 Health Survey with the intention that item data of the latter are often converted to a preference value, which was subsequently used in economic evaluations of interventions. The aim was to compare the equivalence and sensitivity of health preference values derived from the SF-36/SF-12 Health Surveys to that measured directly by the SF-6D for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients.
Methods: This was a secondary analysis of the SF-6D and SF-36 data from a baseline sample of 589 patients with CHB infection with different stages of liver diseases. Degree of agreement (equivalence) between direct-measured and derived SF-6D values was determined using spearman correlation and intra-class correlation. Sensitivity and discriminative power of different SF-6D values were compared by standardized effect size and relative efficiency (RE) statistics.
Results: Significant differences in the direct-measured or derived SF-6D preference values were found between CHB groups. Degree of agreement between SF-6D values was satisfactory. Direct-measured SF-6D was the most efficient, followed by SF-12-derived and the SF-36-derived was the least, based on the standardized effect size and the RE statistics. Sensitivity and discriminative power of direct-measured SF-6D were superior to derived SF-6D among people with different CHB health states.
Conclusions: Although direct-measured and derived SF-6D preference values had satisfactory sensitivity in discriminating between CHB groups, direct-measured SF-6D is the most sensitive and preferable method of obtaining health preference.