Dataset Information

Disability Weights Measurement for 228 Causes of Disease in the Korean Burden of Disease Study 2012.

ABSTRACT: Disability weight for each disease plays a key role in combining years lived with disability and years of life lost in disability adjusted life year. For the Korean Burden of Disease 2012 study, we have conducted a re-estimation of disability weights for causes of disease by adapting the methodology of a recent Global Burden of Disease study. Our study was conducted through a self-administered web-based survey using a paired comparison (PC) as the main valuation method. A total of 496 physicians and medical college students who were attending in third or fourth grade of a regular course conducted the survey. We applied a probit regression on the PC data and computed the predicted probabilities of each cause of disease from the coefficient estimates of the probit regression. We used 'being dead (1)' and 'full health (0)' as anchor points to rescale the predicted probability of each cause of disease on a scale of 0 to 1. By this method, disability weights for a total of 228 causes of disease were estimated. There was a fairly high correlation between the disability weights of overlapping causes of disease from this study and a previous South Korean study despite the differences in valuation methods and time periods. In conclusion, we have shown that disability weights can be estimated based on a PC by including 'full health' and 'being dead' as anchor points without resorting to a person trade-off. Through developments in the methodology of disability weights estimation from this study, disability weights can be easily estimated and continuously revised.

SUBMITTER: Ock M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5081294 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Disability Weights Measurement for 228 Causes of Disease in the Korean Burden of Disease Study 2012.

Ock Minsu M Lee Jin Yong JY Oh In Hwan IH Park Hyesook H Yoon Seok Jun SJ Jo Min Woo MW

Journal of Korean medical science 20161101

Disability weight for each disease plays a key role in combining years lived with disability and years of life lost in disability adjusted life year. For the Korean Burden of Disease 2012 study, we have conducted a re-estimation of disability weights for causes of disease by adapting the methodology of a recent Global Burden of Disease study. Our study was conducted through a self-administered web-based survey using a paired comparison (PC) as the main valuation method. A total of 496 physicians ...[more]

PMID: 27775250

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMeasurement of the global burden of disease with disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) requires disability weights that quantify health losses for all non-fatal consequences of disease and injury. There has been extensive debate about a range of conceptual and methodological issues concerning the definition and measurement of these weights. Our primary objective was a comprehensive re-estimation of disability weights for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010 through a large-scale empirical investigation in which judgments about health losses associated with many causes of disease and injury were elicited from the general public in diverse communities through a new, standardised approach.MethodsWe surveyed respondents in two ways: household surveys of adults aged 18 years or older (face-to-face interviews in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Peru, and Tanzania; telephone interviews in the USA) between Oct 28, 2009, and June 23, 2010; and an open-access web-based survey between July 26, 2010, and May 16, 2011. The surveys used paired comparison questions, in which respondents considered two hypothetical individuals with different, randomly selected health states and indicated which person they regarded as healthier. The web survey added questions about population health equivalence, which compared the overall health benefits of different life-saving or disease-prevention programmes. We analysed paired comparison responses with probit regression analysis on all 220 unique states in the study. We used results from the population health equivalence responses to anchor the results from the paired comparisons on the disability weight scale from 0 (implying no loss of health) to 1 (implying a health loss equivalent to death). Additionally, we compared new disability weights with those used in WHO's most recent update of the Global Burden of Disease Study for 2004.Findings13,902 individuals participated in household surveys and 16,328 in the web survey. Analysis of paired comparison responses indicated a high degree of consistency across surveys: correlations between individual survey results and results from analysis of the pooled dataset were 0·9 or higher in all surveys except in Bangladesh (r=0·75). Most of the 220 disability weights were located on the mild end of the severity scale, with 58 (26%) having weights below 0·05. Five (11%) states had weights below 0·01, such as mild anaemia, mild hearing or vision loss, and secondary infertility. The health states with the highest disability weights were acute schizophrenia (0·76) and severe multiple sclerosis (0·71). We identified a broad pattern of agreement between the old and new weights (r=0·70), particularly in the moderate-to-severe range. However, in the mild range below 0·2, many states had significantly lower weights in our study than previously.InterpretationThis study represents the most extensive empirical effort as yet to measure disability weights. By contrast with the popular hypothesis that disability assessments vary widely across samples with different cultural environments, we have reported strong evidence of highly consistent results.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundThe disability weight (DW) quantifies the severity of health states from disease sequela and is a pivotal parameter for disease burden calculation. We conducted a national and subnational DW measurement in China.MethodsIn 2020-2021, we conducted a web-based survey to assess DWs for 206 health states in 31 Chinese provinces targeting health workers via professional networks. We fielded questions of paired comparison (PC) and population health equivalence (PHE). The PC data were analysed by probit regression analysis, and the regression results were anchored by results from the PHE responses on the DW scale between 0 (no loss of health) and 1 (health loss equivalent to death).FindingsWe used PC responses from 468,541 respondents to estimate DWs of health states. Eight of 11 domains of health had significantly negative coefficients in the regression of the difference between Chinese and Global Burden of Disease (GBD) DWs, suggesting lower DW values for health states with mention of these domains in their lay description. We noted considerable heterogeneity within domains, however. After applying these Chinese DWs to the 2019 GBD estimates for China, total years lived with disability (YLDs) increased by 14·9% to 177 million despite lower estimates for musculoskeletal disorders, cardiovascular diseases, mental disorders, diabetes and chronic kidney disease. The lower estimates of YLDs for these conditions were more than offset by higher estimates of common, low-severity conditions.InterpretationThe differences between the GBD and Chinese DWs suggest that there might be some contextual factors influencing the valuation of health states. While the reduced estimates for mental disorders, alcohol use disorder, and dementia could hint at a culturally different valuation of these conditions in China, the much greater shifts in YLDs from low-severity conditions more likely reflects methodological difficulty to distinguish between health states that vary a little in absolute DW value but a lot in relative terms.FundingThis work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number 82173626], the National Key Research and Development Program of China [grant numbers 2018YFC1315302], Wuhan Medical Research Program of Joint Fund of Hubei Health Committee [grant number WJ2019H304], and Ningxia Natural Science Foundation Project [grant number 2020AAC03436].

Project description:BackgroundThe disability weight is an essential factor to estimate the healthy time that is lost due to living with a certain state of illness. A 2014 review showed a considerable variation in methods used to derive disability weights. Since then, several sets of disability weights have been developed. This systematic review aimed to provide an updated and comparative overview of the methodological design choices and surveying techniques that have been used in disability weights measurement studies and how they evolved over time.MethodsA literature search was conducted in multiple international databases (early-1990 to mid-2021). Records were screened according to pre-defined eligibility criteria. The quality of the included disability weights measurement studies was assessed using the Checklist for Reporting Valuation Studies (CREATE) instrument. Studies were collated by characteristics and methodological design approaches. Data extraction was performed by one reviewer and discussed with a second.ResultsForty-six unique disability weights measurement studies met our eligibility criteria. More than half (n = 27; 59%) of the identified studies assessed disability weights for multiple ill-health outcomes. Thirty studies (65%) described the health states using disease-specific descriptions or a combination of a disease-specific descriptions and generic-preference instruments. The percentage of studies obtaining health preferences from a population-based panel increased from 14% (2004-2011) to 32% (2012-2021). None of the disability weight studies published in the past 10 years used the annual profile approach. Most studies performed panel-meetings to obtain disability weights data.ConclusionsOur review reveals that a methodological uniformity between national and GBD disability weights studies increased, especially from 2010 onwards. Over years, more studies used disease-specific health state descriptions in line with those of the GBD study, panel from general populations, and data from web-based surveys and/or household surveys. There is, however, a wide variation in valuation techniques that were used to derive disability weights at national-level and that persisted over time.

Project description:Background: In India, lack of data and underreporting of cases and deaths due to snakebite makes it difficult to estimate its socio-economic burden. Previous studies measuring economic burden of snakebite in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) using different approaches have been conducted, but none in India. The proposed study aims to provide evidence on disability weights, epidemiological and economic burden due to snakebites in Kerala state, India. Protocol: The study is a community based cross-sectional study recruiting victims of snakebite occurring over a 12 month period prior to start of the study , across Ernakulam district, Kerala state, India. For the community-derived disability weights,70 adult patients who were treated within a 3 month period prior to commencement of the study at Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Kochi or Little Flower Hospital, Angamaly would be interviewed. The study will measure annual incidence, mortality, treatment cost of snakebites along with community-derived disability weights for snakebites in Ernakulam district.. Standard methods for analysis and reporting of mortality, morbidity, Years of Lives Lost (YLL), Years lived with disability (YLD), disability weights, and costs of treatment will be calculated. The study will be started in April 2021 and is expected to be completed by July2021.. Discussion: This protocol is the first published for estimating epidemiological, economic burden and community derived disability weights for snakebites in India. Besides, the Global Burden of Disease has not attached a particular disability weight to snakebite and this would be an attempt to do so. The protocol has been developed using guidelines for cross-sectional studies, cost of illness studies and international guidelines for conducting community derived disability weights. The evidence generated by this study will contribute significantly to knowledge regarding the epidemiology, economic burden and community-derived disability weights for snakebites in India and other countries where incidence of snakebite is high.

Dataset Information

Disability Weights Measurement for 228 Causes of Disease in the Korean Burden of Disease Study 2012.

Publications

Disability Weights Measurement for 228 Causes of Disease in the Korean Burden of Disease Study 2012.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets