Abstract
Health state values, often in the form of value sets that list values applied to particular health states, are used in cost-effectiveness analyses of health care to calculate gains in quality-adjusted life-years. These values are subject to several sources of uncertainty, arising from the fact that values are not constants but variables and are of different types including variability, heterogeneity, statistical uncertainty, and methodological variation. Currently, these sources are not fully documented and are not fully accounted for when creating and analyzing economic evaluation models. This may provide to users of such models a false sense of the precision of quality-adjusted life-year gain estimates and therefore of cost-effectiveness. This article provides a comprehensive account of such sources of uncertainty and how they interact. It also provides a more detailed account of how uncertainty arises in studies that elicit and model value sets. Its aim is to encourage research to measure and report uncertainty around health state values so it can be better accounted for in cost-effectiveness analyses.HighlightsHealth state values (HSVs) used in cost-effectiveness analysis are subject to multiple types of uncertainty, including variability, heterogeneity, statistical uncertainty, and methodological variation.Current reporting and guidelines often fail to fully document or address all sources of uncertainty in HSVs, which can mislead users about the precision of QALY and cost-effectiveness estimates.Valuation studies should report measures of uncertainty (such as standard errors or variance/covariance matrices) for HSVs, not just point estimates.Researchers, decision modellers, and guideline developers should recognise, measure, and report HSV uncertainty more thoroughly to improve the reliability of cost-effectiveness analyses.