Aphasia-specific or generic outcomes? a comparison of two health-related quality of life instruments for economic evaluations of aphasia treatments
Our findings suggest that EQ-5D-3L use in economic evaluations including people with aphasia requires caution. Alternative HRQOL instruments require evaluation to ensure fair prioritisation of aphasia treatments.
Authors
- Miranda L. Rose (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8892-0965)
- Sarah J. Wallace (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0600-9343)
- Joosup Kim (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4079-0428)
- Kathleen L. Bagot (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2895-4327)
- John E. Pierce (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5164-5106)
- Sam Harvey (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4839-2117)
- Dominique Ann-Michele Cadilhac (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8162-682X)
- Sally Zingelman (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0599-5708)
Institutions
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- La Trobe University (AU)
- Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health (AU)
- Metro South Health (AU)
- Monash Health (AU)
- Monash University (AU)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Quality of Life Research
- Published
- 2025-07-26
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-025-04040-8
- Primary Topic
- Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00
Funders
- University of Queensland