Well having a 24 hour sickness bug gave me some opportunities to sleep and think!
Obviously I have collaborators and am not in sole position to make the final call on whether we go ahead with the design Karin and I put together. But I think we may be almost ready to get programming!
I’m excited by this: it draws on various findings from previous projects I have been involved with: the DCE is not highly efficient but it serves its purpose, and, importantly, that of the Case 2 (Profile Case) BWS study. I think we might have had difficulties making this work for the original EQ-5D (3-level version), partly due to issues like the “states that make no sense” but the edited wording for the 5-Level version have helped enormously.
This project certainly won’t provide “the answer” as to whether using BWS can or should be used for valuation. However, if it works, (1) I believe it’ll be a major step forward and (2) I hope the EuroQoL group funds follow-up work.
The general thinking is that I don’t think everyone out there can do a “single all singing-all-dancing” valuation task; splitting it into two or three (I believe) will ultimately tell us more and give more flexibility. After all, lead-time TTOs are used for states worse than death so the precedent of more than one task is there. As I mentioned before, even if what we do “works”, there are inevitably issues the Group would have to discuss regarding the use of different valuation techniques etc, which I won’t pre-empt nor under-estimate.