Skip to main content

Table 4 Comparison of the 5 models based on the combined set

From: Results from an exploratory study to test the performance of EQ-5D-3L valuation subsets based on orthogonal designs, and an investigation into some modeling and transformation alternatives for the utility function

 

Baseline model

N1

N2

N3

C3Sq

Constant

0.8685

0.9830

0.8865

0.9279

0.8921

MO2

−0.1350

−0.1437

−0.1084

−0.1442

−0.1395

MO3

−0.3874

−0.4061

−0.3725

−0.3749

−0.4325

SC2

−0.0975

−0.1061

−0.0766

−0.0876

−0.0911

SC3

−0.1614

−0.1802

−0.1581

−0.1394

−0.2023

UA2

−0.0764

−0.0850

−0.0613

−0.0475

−0.0674

UA3

−0.0988

−0.1176

−0.1070

−0.0673

−0.1322

PD2

−0.0495

−0.0650

−0.0289

−0.0587

−0.0523

PD3

−0.1390

−0.1510

−0.1362

−0.1265

−0.1807

AD2

−0.0410

−0.0426

−0.0202

−0.0494

−0.0420

AD3

−0.0849

−0.1108

−0.0816

−0.0720

−0.1282

N1

 

−0.0831

   

N2

  

−0.0709

  

N3

   

−0.1119

 

C3Sq

    

0.0100

Adj R Sq

0.5550

0.5597

0.5588

0.5647

0.5597

Correl Model vs Observed

0.9816

0.9847

0.9840

0.9881

0.9867

% MAE Model vs Observed

3.0%

3.1%

2.7%

2.4%

2.7%

% MAE Model vs Holdouts

2.8%

2.8%

3.5%

1.5%

2.6%

% Residuals >0.05

11%

13%

21%

11%

13%