Workshop: The use of ICECAP measures in clinical trials and
This two-day workshop was held February 15-16, 2011 at the
Centre for Professional Development in Birmingham. It was
sponsored by the Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology
The ICECAP measures are recently developed
single index measures of general wellbeing. They have been
developed to offer an alternative or supplement to traditional
health (QALY) measures for economic evaluation. In the ICECAP
measures, wellbeing is measured in terms of individuals’ capability
to do what is valued in life. While the approach offers a promising
normative alternative for outcome measurement and economic
evaluation, many challenges exist in applying the measures in
- a series of presentations of applied work
using the ICECAP measure in different trial settings and
- updates on methodological developments on
the ICECAP (including the development, valuation and validation of
- ‘break-out’ sessions on specific
methodological issues related to using ICECAP measures in trials
and economic evaluations.
The ICECAP users’ workshop attracted 34
participants from a wide range of institutions both in the UK and
overseas (Netherlands, Australia, Canada, USA). Participants
included individuals involved in developing the ICECAP tools (to
measure ‘capability wellbeing’), individuals using the measures in
trials and economic evaluation, trials experts from the HTMR
Network and individuals with an interest in the measurement of
human capabilities. Most participants presented, discussed or
chaired a paper.
The presentations outlined the properties of
ICECAP measures (such as feasibility and validity) across a diverse
range of trials. Methodological talks identified important issues
for further investigation in terms of the completion, valuation and
anchoring of the ICECAP measures.
The key issues to emerge from the discussions
were around the use of the measures for economic evaluation, and
how to gain a better understanding of the non-health gap that the
ICECAP measures can fill. Discussion groups were used to generate
clear ideas about the areas where further research was needed.
A discussion paper responding to the issues
raised at the workshop is being finalised for submission to a
leading disciplinary journal.