ICECAP-O, the current state of play: a systematic review of studies reporting the psychometric properties and use of the instrument over the decade since its publication

Proud, Louise; McLoughlin, Carol; Kinghorn, Philip

doi:10.1007/s11136-019-02114-y

Cited by 40 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Capability measures may better capture these benefits compared to HRQL outcomes. The ICECAP-O [15] measures this construct in older adults, but it has not been used in a cataract patient population [16]. The ICECAP-O's five domains cover attachment (love and friendship), security (thinking about the future without concern), role (doing things that make you feel valued), enjoyment and control (independence).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Brazier et al [20] recommend that a PBM is chosen based on the psychometric performance (including construct validity and responsiveness) in the patient population. Whilst the EQ-5D has been used in a cataract population before [18,21], there is currently no published evidence of the use of the ICECAP-O [16]. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the construct validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L + VIS and ICECAP-O in a cataract patient population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing the construct validity and responsiveness of Preference-Based Measures (PBMs) in cataract surgery patients

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L in visual conditions has been questioned, inspiring development of a vision 'bolt-on' domain (EQ-5D-3L + VIS). Developments in preference-based measures (PBM) also includes the EQ-5D-5L and the ICECAP-O capability wellbeing measure. This study aimed to examine the construct validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L + VIS and ICECAP-O in cataract surgery patients for the first time, to inform choice of PBM for economic evaluation in this population. Methods The analyses used data from the UK Predict-CAT cataract surgery cohort study. PBMs and the Cat-PROM5 [a validated measure of cataract quality of life (QOL)] were completed before surgery and 4-8 weeks after. Construct validity was assessed using correlations and known-group differences evaluated using regression. Responsiveness was evaluated using effect sizes and analysis of variance to compare change scores between groups, defined by patient-reported and clinical outcomes. Results The sample comprised 1315 patients at baseline. No PBMs were associated with visual acuity and only the ICECAP-O (Spearman's rs = − 0.35), EQ-5D-3L + VIS (rs = − 0.42) and EQ-5D-5L (Value Set for England rs = − 0.31) correlated at least moderately with the Cat-PROM5. Effect sizes of change were consistently largest for the EQ-5D-3L + VIS (range 0.34-0.41), followed by the ICECAP-O (range 0.20-0.34). Results indicated no improvement in responsiveness using the EQ-5D-5L (range 0.13-0.16) compared to the EQ-5D-3L (range 0.17-0.20). Conclusions Whilst no PBMs comprehensively demonstrated evidence of construct validity and responsiveness in cataract surgery patients, the ICECAP-O was the most responsive generic PBM to improvements in QOL. Surprisingly the EQ-5D-5L was not more responsive than the EQ-5D-3L in this setting.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the construct validity and responsiveness of Preference-Based Measures (PBMs) in cataract surgery patients

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, the ICECAP-O recommended by NICE is targeted at a subgroup of the population (older adults), whilst the ASCOT was specifically developed for the assessment of social care interventions. A recent review of the literature examined current trends in the application of ICECAP-O [11]. The authors found that the ICECAP-O has mainly been included as a secondary economic measure and the reporting of results is brief with minimal detail and often no discussion or interpretation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capability instruments in economic evaluations of health-related interventions: a comparative review of the literature

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Given increasing interest in using the capability approach for health economic evaluations and a growing literature, this paper aims to synthesise current information about the characteristics of capability instruments and their application in health economic evaluations. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted to assess studies that contained information on the development, psychometric properties and valuation of capability instruments, or their application in economic evaluations. Results The review identified 98 studies and 14 instruments for inclusion. There is some evidence on the psychometric properties of most instruments. Most papers found moderate-to-high correlation between health and capability measures, ranging between 0.41 and 0.64. ASCOT, ICECAP-A,-O and-SCM instruments have published valuation sets, most frequently developed using best-worst scaling. Thirteen instruments were originally developed in English and one in Portuguese; however, some translations to other languages are available. Ten economic evaluations using capability instruments were identified. The presentation of results show a lack of consensus regarding the most appropriate way to use capability instruments in economic evaluations with discussion about capability-adjusted life years (CALYs), years of capability equivalence and the trade-off between maximisation of capability versus sufficient capability. Conclusion There has been increasing interest in applying the capability-based approach in health economic evaluations, but methodological and conceptual issues remain. There is still a need for direct comparison of the different capability instruments and for clear guidance on when and how they should be used in economic evaluations.

show abstract

“…ASCOT can be used to generate the social care equivalent of the QALY (Bulamu et al, 2015;Makai et al, 2014). Another generic tool is ICECAP for older people, based on a capability approach (Coast et al, 2008), which is particularly suitable for people without or with only mild social care needs (Proud et al, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making the Economic Case for Adult Social Care: The EconomicS of Social carE CompEndium (ESSENCE) Project

Tinelli

Bauer

Knapp

et al. 2020

Journal of Long Term Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ICECAP-O, the current state of play: a systematic review of studies reporting the psychometric properties and use of the instrument over the decade since its publication

Cited by 40 publications

References 59 publications

Assessing the construct validity and responsiveness of Preference-Based Measures (PBMs) in cataract surgery patients

Assessing the construct validity and responsiveness of Preference-Based Measures (PBMs) in cataract surgery patients

Capability instruments in economic evaluations of health-related interventions: a comparative review of the literature

Making the Economic Case for Adult Social Care: The EconomicS of Social carE CompEndium (ESSENCE) Project

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About