Providing an extended use of an otological‐specific outcome instrument to derive cost‐effectiveness estimates of treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Although quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) are increasingly being used by decision-makers to make comparisons of cost-effectiveness, there are no otological-specific outcome measures that fit within this QALY framework. This study had two main objectives. The first was to provide a means to derive QALYs from a condition-specific otological instrument (Cambridge Otology Quality of Life, COQOL), and the second was to assess the convergent validity, or degree of correlation, between the COQOL and SF-6D, an established QALY instrument. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study designed to assess the convergent validity between SF-6D and COQOL and to generate a mapping function to enable SF-6D values to be predicted from the COQOL responses. SETTING: Cambridge University Hospital, UK. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 207 patients attending a routine outpatient general otology clinic. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: SF-6D and the COQOL instrument completed at baseline and again 3 months later. RESULTS: Convergent validity was demonstrated with mean SF-6D values decreasing linearly with increasing severity on the COQOL instrument. Overall, the correlation between the COQOL scores and the SF-6D values was moderate and statistically significant (r = 0.490, P = <0.001). A simple mapping model based on an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression function predicted SF-6D values from the COQOL data with a reasonable degree of accuracy. Further validation using the follow-up 3-month data confirmed the prediction power of this mapping model. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a method for estimating QALYs from condition-specific COQOL data and provides the opportunity for the cost-effectiveness of otological treatment to be measured and placed within the national QALY framework.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".