Choosing between measures: comparison of EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 in persons with hearing complaints.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Grutters JP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2039846 | biostudies-other | 2007 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe EQ-5D has been frequently used in national health surveys. This study is a head-to-head comparison to assess how expanding the number of levels from three (EQ-5D-3L) to five in the new EQ-5D-5L version has improved its distribution, discriminatory power, and validity in the general population.MethodsA representative sample (N = 7554) from the Catalan Health Interview Survey 2011-2012, aged ≥18, answered both EQ-5D versions, and we evaluated the response redistribution and inconsistencies between them. To assess validity of this redistribution, we calculated the mean of the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), which measures perceived health. The discriminatory power was examined with Shannon Indices, calculated for each dimension separately. Spanish preference value sets were applied to obtain utility indices, examining their distribution with statistics of central tendency and dispersion. We estimated the proportion of individuals reporting the best health state in EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L within groups of specific chronic conditions and their VAS mean.ResultsA very small reduction in the percentage of individuals with the best health state was observed, from 61.8% in EQ-5D-3L to 60.8% in EQ-5D-5L. In contrast, a large proportion of individuals reporting extreme problems in the 3 L version moved to severe problems (level 4) in the 5 L version, particularly for pain/discomfort (75.5%) and anxiety/depression (66.4%). The average proportion of inconsistencies was 0.9%. The pattern of the perceived health VAS mean confirmed the hypothesis established a priori, supporting the validity of the observed redistribution. Shannon index showed that absolute informativity was higher in the 5 L version for all dimensions. The means (SD) of the Spanish EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L indices were 0.87 (0.25) and 0.89 (0.22). The proportion of individuals with the best health state within each specific chronic condition was very similar, regardless of the EQ-5D version (≤ 30% in half of the 28 chronic conditions).ConclusionAlthough the proportion of individuals with the best possible health state is still very high, our findings support that the increase of levels provided by the EQ-5D-5L contributed to the validity and discriminatory power of this new version to measure health in general population, as in the national health surveys.
| S-EPMC6097421 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to estimate the relationship between EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L, in both directions, using a single model.MethodsAn online survey containing both variants of EQ-5D, with randomised ordering, was administered to a large UK sample in 2020. A joint statistical model of the ten EQ-5D responses (five at 5L, five at 3L), using a multi-equation ordinal regression framework was estimated. The joint model ensures mappings in either direction are fully consistent with the information in the sample and satisfy Bayes' rule. Three extensions enhance model flexibility: a copula specification allows differing degrees of correlation between the 3L and 5L responses at the upper and lower extremes of health; a normal mixture residual distribution gives flexibility in the distributional form of responses; and a common factor captures correlations in responses across the five dimensions.ResultsAlmost 50,000 responses were received. Thirty-five percent of respondents reported an existing medical condition. Ninety percent of possible 3L and 43% of possible 5L health states were observed. The preferred model specification includes age, sex and the responses to the EQ-5D instrument. Close alignment to the observed data was observed both in within-sample and out-of-sample comparisons.ConclusionThe results from this study provide a means of translating evidence to or from EQ-5D-3L to or from 5L based on a large-scale UK population survey with randomised ordering. Mapping can be performed either using descriptive system responses, individual utility scores or summary statistics.
| S-EPMC9883358 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe SF-6D and EQ-5D are widely used generic index measures as health-related quality of life. We assessed within-subject agreement between SF-6D and EQ-5D utilities with different preference weights, and their validities in measuring Chinese rural residents, before and after standardization scores.Methodology/principal findingsRural residents over 18 years old were interviewed using EQ-5D and SF-6D in Jiangsu Province, China. EQ-5D utility-scoring algorithms were used from three conversion tables from the United Kingdom, Japan, and the United States. Validities, Sensitivity and agreement between instruments were computed and compared. Factors affecting utility difference were explored with multiple liner regression models. Scores with standardization intervals of 0-1 in the two instruments were analyzed by the use of the above methods again. In 929 respondents, relative efficiency statistic and receiver operating characteristic curves analysis showed SF-6D to be the more efficient, followed by the EQ-5D model in Japan weights. Bland-Altman plot analysis showed paired SF-6D/EQ-5D in UK weights had better agreement. Though some risk factors were found, multiple liner regression demonstrated most coefficients were weaker than 0.2, and all R(2) values were less than 0.06. Standardization did not significantly influence these results except scores' value.Conclusions/significanceSF-6D and next EQ-5D in Japan weights could be used for Chinese rural residents. Further research with larger sample size of population is needed to establish and determine the feasibility of standardization score.
| S-EPMC3407238 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe EuroQoL 5D (EQ-5D) has been widely used in studies of cardiac disease, but its measurement properties in this group are not well established. The study aimed to quantify the relationship between measures commonly used in studies of cardiac disease and the EQ-5D index across different levels of disease severity.MethodsPatient-level data from 7 studies of cardiac interventions were used, which included randomised trials and observational studies. Relationships between the EQ-5D index and commonly used cardiac measures, Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) angina severity class, treadmill exercise time (ETT) and scales of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) were examined. Mixed effects linear regression was used to assess these relationships, with the EQ-5D index as the response.ResultsStudy sample sizes ranged from 68 to 2419. Mean baseline EQ-5D index ranged from 0.77 in patients at diagnosis (95% CI 0.75, 0.78) to 0.43 in patients with advanced disease (95% CI 0.39, 0.48) and differed significantly across studies (p < 0.001). There was evidence of a ceiling effect in patients at diagnosis. The minimum clinically important difference of a one minute increase in ETT was associated with a 0.019 (95% CI 0.014, 0.025) increase in EQ-5D index. One class increase in CCS was associated with a 0.11 (95% CI 0.09, 0.13) decrease in EQ-5D index. A 10 unit increase in SAQ scales was associated with increases between 0.04 and 0.07 in EQ-5D index (95% CIs 0.03, 0.05 and 0.05, 0.08). Tests of heterogeneity indicated the EQ-5D-covariate relationships were consistent across levels of disease severity for ETT and the treatment satisfaction scale of the SAQ, but heterogeneous for age, gender, CCS angina class and other scales of the SAQ.ConclusionThe EQ-5D index varies with coronary disease severity. The relationship between the EQ-5D index and an outcome measure used in cardiac intervention studies, ETT, was consistent across disease severity levels, but the relationship between demographic variables, CCS angina class and most of the SAQ scales and the EQ-5D index was heterogeneous for patients with different levels of coronary disease. Differences in the EQ-5D index associated with clinically important differences in cardiac measures can be quantified and vary between three important examples - angina class, ETT and SAQ.
| S-EPMC2789057 | biostudies-literature
Project description:EQ-5D is a 5-item questionnaire instrument designed to measure health-related quality of life. It is extremely important, since it is used to measure health benefits in many studies providing evidence for reimbursement decisions by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in England and similar policy bodies in other countries. EQ-5D has been redesigned in a more detailed form (EQ-5D-5L), but much existing cost-effectiveness evidence is based on the older version (EQ-5D-3L). Statistical mapping from one version to another is widely used, exploiting data from multi-instrument surveys incorporating both variants. However, little is known about the robustness of data from such multi-instrument surveys. We design a randomized experiment to investigate whether inclusion of both versions at different stages in a single interview gives a reliable picture of the relationship between health measures from the two instruments and embed it in individual interviews from the UK Understanding Society household panel. We find that sequencing of the two versions of EQ-5D within an interview has a significant impact not only on the resulting data but also on the estimated mapping models. We illustrate the non-negligible effects in two real-world cost-effectiveness examples and discuss the implications for future multi-instrument survey design.
| S-EPMC9303872 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe EQ-5D-5L and its value sets are widely used internationally. However, in the US and elsewhere, there is growing use of PROMIS, which has a value set (PROPr) based on the stated preferences of the US population. This paper aims to compare the characteristics of EQ-5D-5L and PROPr value sets and to highlight potential implications for users.MethodsUS, Australian and English value sets were used for EQ-5D-5L. PROPr utilities were calculated based on PROMIS-29 + 2. We examined, in each case, (i) the characteristics (e.g. range of values, number of unique values) and distribution of all possible 'theoretical' utilities; (ii) dimension/domain importance ranking by the utility of corner states (i.e. health states with the worst level in one domain and the best in all others); (iii) comparisons of utilities for health states hypothesised to be comparable in terms of severity across EQ-5D-5L descriptive systems and PROMIS-29 + 2 domain scores; (iv) the changes in values of adjacent states (i.e. a one-level change in one dimension for EQ-5D-5L and a four-point change in raw scores for PROMIS-29 + 2, with the other dimensions held constant) for dimensions hypothesised to overlap conceptually or be correlated between the two instruments.ResultsEQ-5D-5L and PROPr utilities differ systematically. First, the US EQ-5D-5L utilities range from - 0.573 to 1, whereas PROPr values for PROMIS-29 + 2 range from - 0.022 to 0.954. Second, in the US (and English) EQ-5D-5L value sets, pain is the most important dimension whereas in PROPr pain is one of the least important (apart from sleep disturbance). Third, classified based on severity across EQ-5D-5L descriptive systems and PROMIS-29 + 2 domain scores, PROPr has substantially lower values than EQ-5D-5L values for comparable 'mild' health states, but higher values for more 'severe' health states. Last, when one dimension is considered across its best to worst levels and all other dimensions are held constant at their best or moderate level, in EQ-5D-5L value sets, the greatest changes in utility occur between levels 3 and 4 (moderate and severe) problems; in PROPr that occurred between the most severe states and their descriptively adjacent health states.ConclusionThere are very considerable differences between US EQ-5D-5L and PROPr utilities, despite both in principle representing utility on the same scale anchored at 0 and 1 and both representing the preferences of the US general public. It is important for decision makers and clinical triallists to be aware of these differences. Further work is needed to assess the impact of these differences in value sets using population and patient data, and in longitudinal settings.
| S-EPMC8866274 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:EQ-5D-Y is a generic measure of health status for children and adolescents aged 8-15 years. Originally, it has three levels of severity in each dimension (3L). This study aimed to develop a descriptive system of EQ-5D-Y with an increased number of severity levels and to test comprehensibility and feasibility. METHODS:The study was conducted in Germany, Spain, Sweden and the UK. In Phase 1, a review of existing instruments and focus group interviews were carried out to create a pool of possible labels for a modified severity classification. Participants aged 8-15 rated the severity of the identified labels in individual sorting and response scaling interviews. In Phase 2, preliminary 4L and 5L versions were constructed for further testing in cognitive interviews with healthy participants aged 8-15 years and children receiving treatment for a health condition. RESULTS:In Phase 1, a total of 233 labels was generated, ranging from 37 (UK) to 79 labels (Germany). Out of these, 7 to 16 possible labels for each dimension in the different languages were rated in 255 sorting and response scaling interviews. Labels covered an appropriate range of severity on the health continuum in all countries. In Phase 2, the 5L version was generally preferred (by 68-88% of the participants per country) over the 4L version. CONCLUSIONS:This multinational study has provided a version of the EQ-5D-Y with 5 severity levels in each dimension. This extended version (EQ-5D-Y-5L) requires testing its psychometric properties and its performance compared to that of the original EQ-5D-Y-3L.
| S-EPMC6571085 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThe majority of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) don't have population norms in Romania. This is the case with the EQ-5D as well. Therefore, we aimed to estimate population norms for the Romanian versions of the EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L, their indexes, and the EQ-VAS.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted in all regions of Romania from November 2018 to November 2019. A three-stage probability sampling procedure stratified by region and settlement size was used to select a representative sample. Interviews were computer-assisted and conducted in respondents' homes by trained interviewers. Health status was assessed with the EQ-5D-5L, the EQ-5D-3L and the EQ VAS. Descriptive statistics were used to estimate population norms by age groups and sex for the EQ-5D-5L, the EQ-5D-3L, their indexes and the EQ VAS. Population norms were weighted using survey weights. Indexes for the EQ-5D questionnaires were estimated using the recently developed Romanian value sets.ResultsData from 1,649 interviews was analysed in the present study. Survey weights were used so that sex and place of residence ratios for the weighted sample matched the Romanian general population distribution. Participants' mean age was 47.4 years (SE = 1.157) and 50.3% of them reported being in good health. The dimension for which people reported the highest number of problems for both questionnaires was the pain/discomfort dimension. Men aged 35 plus reported fewer problems with pain/discomfort than women for both the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L. Health decreased with age as shown by the decrease from age group 18-24 to age group 75 plus in the indexes of both questionnaires: from 0.977 (SE = 0.005) to 0.765 (SE = 0.017) for EQ-5D-5L and from 0.981 (SE = 0.005) to 0.784 (SE = 0.019) for EQ-5D-3L. There was 29.9 points drop in the EQ VAS score between the youngest and oldest group.ConclusionsPopulation norms for the Romanian versions of the EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L, their indexes, and the EQ VAS are now available. These can now be used as reference values by healthcare professionals, researchers and decision-makers leading to a further development of health-related quality of life research in Romania.
| S-EPMC10386277 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE: Economic evaluation typically is conducted using health state utilities to estimate treatment benefits. However, such outcomes are often missing from studies of clinical effectiveness. This study aims to bridge that gap by providing appropriate methods to link values from the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) to the EQ-5D utility instrument. METHOD: Patients from a large registry of Spanish patients (n?=?7072 observations) with knee or hip osteoarthritis who completed both WOMAC and EQ-5D was used. A mixture model approach was used based on distributions bespoke to the EQ-5D UK value set to estimate EQ-5D as a function of WOMAC pain, stiffness and function subscores. RESULTS: A five class mixture model provides very close fit to the observed data at all levels of disease severity. The overall mean (0.542 vs 0.542), median (0.620 vs 0.636) and the percentage of observations at full health (15 vs 14.8) were very similar between the observed data and the estimated model respectively. Stiffness has limited relationship to EQ-5D, whereas functional disability and pain are strong predictors. CONCLUSION: EQ-5D can be reliably estimated from WOMAC subscale scores without any systematic bias using these results.
| S-EPMC4007823 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the responsiveness of and correlation between the EQ-5D-5L and the QOLIE-31P in patients with epilepsy, and develop a mapping function to predict EQ-5D-5L values based on the QOLIE-31P for use in economic evaluations.MethodsThe dataset was derived from two clinical trials, the ZMILE study in the Netherlands and the SMILE study in the UK. In both studies, patients' quality of life using the EQ-5D-5L and QOLIE-31P was measured at baseline and 12 months follow-up. Spearman's correlations, effect sizes (EF) and standardized response means (SRM) were calculated for both the EQ-5D-5L and QOLIE-31P domains and sub scores. Mapping functions were derived using ordinary least square (OLS) and censored least absolute deviations models.ResultsA total of 509 patients were included in this study. Low to moderately strong significant correlations were found between both instruments. The EQ-5D-5L showed high ceiling effects and small EFs and SRMs, whereas the QOLIE-31P did not show ceiling effects and also showed small to moderate EFs and SRMs. Results of the different mapping functions indicate that the highest adjusted R 2 we were able to regress was 0.265 using an OLS model with squared terms, leading to a mean absolute error of 0.103.ConclusionsResults presented in this study emphasize the shortcomings of the EQ-5D-5L in epilepsy and the importance of the development of condition-specific preference-based instruments which can be used within the QALY framework. In addition, the usefulness of the constructed mapping function in economic evaluations is questionable.
| S-EPMC6008365 | biostudies-literature