References

• 2012Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study1,616 cited
• 2016Dutch Tariff for the Five-Level Version of EQ-5D1,110 cited
• 2017Estimating an EQ-5D-5L Value Set for China697 cited
• 2018German Value Set for the EQ-5D-5L592 cited
• 2015A Time Trade-off-derived Value Set of the EQ-5D-5L for Canada448 cited
• 2014A Program of Methodological Research to Arrive at the New International EQ-5D-5L Valuation Protocol431 cited
• 2016The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Korea393 cited
• 2019United States Valuation of EQ-5D-5L Health States Using an International Protocol392 cited
• 2018Is EQ-5D-5L Better Than EQ-5D-3L? A Head-to-Head Comparison of Descriptive Systems and Value Sets from Seven Countries381 cited
• 2019Overview, Update, and Lessons Learned From the International EQ-5D-5L Valuation Work: Version 2 of the EQ-5D-5L Valuation Protocol360 cited
• 2016Comparison of Value Set Based on DCE and/or TTO Data: Scoring for EQ-5D-5L Health States in Japan316 cited
• 2007Psychometric Comparison of the Standard EQ-5D to a 5 Level Version in Cancer Patients259 cited
• 2016EuroQol Protocols for Time Trade-Off Valuation of Health Outcomes245 cited
• 2017Handling Data Quality Issues to Estimate the Spanish EQ-5D-5L Value Set Using a Hybrid Interval Regression Approach