Background The ICECAP-O and the ICECAP-A are validated capability well-being instruments. To be used in economic evaluations, multidimensional instruments require weighting of the distinguished well-being states. These weights are usually obtained through ex ante preference elicitation (i.e., decision utility) but could also be based on experienced utility.
Objective This article describes the development of value sets for ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A based on experienced utility and compares them with current decision utility weights.
Methods Data from 2 cross-sectional samples corresponding to the target groups of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A were used in 2 separate analyses. The utility impacts of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels were assessed through regression models using a composite measure of subjective well-being as a proxy for experienced utility. The observed utility impacts were rescaled to match the 0 to 1 range of the existing value set. Results The calculated experienced utility values were similar to the decision utility weights for some of the ICECAP dimensions but deviated for others. The largest differences were found for weights of the ICECAP-O dimension enjoyment and the ICECAP-A dimensions attachment and autonomy.
Conclusions The results suggest a different weighting of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels if experienced utility is used instead of decision utility.

capability approach, decision utility, economic evaluation, experienced utility, health state valuation,
Medical Decision Making: an international journal
Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management (ESHPM)

Himmler, S.F.W, van Exel, N.J.A, & Brouwer, W.B.F. (2020). Happy with Your Capabilities?. Medical Decision Making: an international journal, 40(4), 498–510. doi:10.1177/0272989X20923015