Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 6/2010

01-08-2010

Discriminative capacity of the EQ-5D, SF-6D, and SF-12 as measures of health status in population health survey

Auteurs: Oriol Cunillera, Ricard Tresserras, Luis Rajmil, Gemma Vilagut, Pilar Brugulat, Mike Herdman, Anna Mompart, Antonia Medina, Yolanda Pardo, Jordi Alonso, John Brazier, Montse Ferrer

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 6/2010

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the EQ-5D, SF-6D, and SF-12 in terms of their capacity to discriminate between groups defined by relevant socio-demographic and health characteristics in a general population survey.

Methods

Data were obtained from the 2006 Catalan Health Interview Survey, a representative sample (n = 4,319) of the general population of Catalonia (Spain). Effect sizes (ES) and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated to evaluate the instruments’ capacity to distinguish between groups based on socio-demographic variables, recent health problems, perceived health, psychological distress, and selected chronic conditions.

Results

All instruments showed a similar discriminative capacity between groups based on socio-demographic variables, recent medical visit (ES = 0.47–0.55), activity limitations (ES = 0.92–0.98), perceived health (ES = 0.97–1.33), and psychological well-being (ES = 1.17–1.57). Effect sizes between respondents with and without any of fourteen selected chronic conditions were large (0.76–1.04) for 4, moderate (0.55–0.74) for 8, and small (0.17–0.39) for two on the EQ-5D index. A similar pattern was observed for the SF-12 but ES were predominantly moderate (7 conditions) or small (6 conditions) on the SF-6D.

Conclusions

The EQ-5D and SF-12 were largely comparable in estimating the health burden of chronic conditions, recent health problems, and social inequalities. The SF-6D was less sensitive than the EQ-5D index and SF-12, particularly for physical chronic conditions.
vorige artikel Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of a Brazilian Portuguese version of the chronic pain grade
volgende artikel Psychometric evaluation of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale in a large community sample of adolescents in Hong Kong
Literatuur
1.
Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. (2002). Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Quality of Life Research, 11(3), 193–205.CrossRef
2.
Macran, S., Weatherly, H., & Kind, P. (2003). Measuring population health: A comparison of three generic health status measures. Medical Care, 41(2), 218–231.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Fitzpatrick, R., Fletcher, A., Gore, S., Jones, D., Spiegelhalter, D., & Cox, D. (1992). Quality of life measures in health care. I: Applications and issues in assessment. British Medical Journal, 305(6861), 1074–1077.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Luo, N., Johnson, J. A., Shaw, J. W., Feeny, D., & Coons, S. J. (2005). Self-reported health status of the general adult U.S. population as assessed by the EQ-5D and Health Utilities Index. Medical Care, 43(11), 1078–1086.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Kind, P., Dolan, P., Gudex, C., & Williams, A. (1998). Variations in population health status: Results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. British Medical Journal, 316(7133), 736–741.PubMed
6.
Johnson, J. A., & Pickard, A. S. (2000). Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 health surveys in a general population survey in Alberta, Canada. Medical Care, 38(1), 115–121.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Devlin, N., Hansen, P., & Herbison, P. (2000). Variations in self-reported health status: Results from a New Zealand survey. The New Zealand Medical Journal, 113(1123), 517–520.PubMed
8.
Burstrom, K., Johannesson, M., & Rehnberg, C. (2007). Deteriorating health status in Stockholm 1998–2002: Results from repeated population surveys using the EQ-5D. Quality of Life Research, 16(9), 1547–1553.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Saarni, S. I., Harkanen, T., Sintonen, H., Suvisaari, J., Koskinen, S., Aromaa, A., et al. (2006). The impact of 29 chronic conditions on health-related quality of life: A general population survey in Finland using 15D and EQ-5D. Quality of Life Research, 15(8), 1403–1414.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Shin, H., & Kim, D. (2008). Health inequality measurement in Korea using EuroQol-5 dimension valuation weights. Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, 41(3), 165–172.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Dolan, P. (1997). Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Medical Care, 35(11), 1095–1108.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Petrou, S., & Hockley, C. (2005). An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population. Health Economics, 14(11), 1169–1189.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Han, T. S., Tijhuis, M. A., Lean, M. E., & Seidell, J. C. (1998). Quality of life in relation to overweight and body fat distribution. American Journal of Public Health, 88(12), 1814–1820.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Silvers, K. M., & Scott, K. M. (2002). Fish consumption and self-reported physical and mental health status. Public Health Nutrition, 5(3), 427–431.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Schmitz, N., & Kruse, J. (2007). The SF-36 summary scores and their relation to mental disorders: Physical functioning may affect performance of the summary scores. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(2), 163–170.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Ware, J., Jr., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1996). A 12-item short-form health survey: Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care, 34(3), 220–233.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Brazier, J., Roberts, J., & Deverill, M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics, 21(2), 271–292.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Brazier, J. E., & Roberts, J. (2004). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Medical Care, 42(9), 851–859.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Stucki, G., Liang, M. H., Fossel, A. H., & Katz, J. N. (1995). Relative responsiveness of condition-specific and generic health status measures in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 48(11), 1369–1378.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Walters, S. J., & Brazier, J. E. (2005). Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Quality of Life Research, 14(6), 1523–1532.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Barton, G. R., Bankart, J., Davis, A. C., & Summerfield, Q. A. (2004). Comparing utility scores before and after hearing-aid provision: Results according to the EQ-5D, HUI3 and SF-6D. Appl Health Econ Health Policy, 3(2), 103–105.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Fisk, J. D., Brown, M. G., Sketris, I. S., Metz, L. M., Murray, T. J., & Stadnyk, K. J. (2005). A comparison of health utility measures for the evaluation of multiple sclerosis treatments. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 76(1), 58–63.CrossRef
23.
Lamers, L. M., Bouwmans, C. A., van Straten, A., Donker, M. C., & Hakkaart, L. (2006). Comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities in mental health patients. Health Economics, 15(11), 1229–1236.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Marra, C. A., Woolcott, J. C., Kopec, J. A., Shojania, K., Offer, R., Brazier, J. E., et al. (2005). A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Social Science and Medicine, 60(7), 1571–1582.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Stavem, K., Froland, S. S., & Hellum, K. B. (2005). Comparison of preference-based utilities of the 15D, EQ-5D and SF-6D in patients with HIV/AIDS. Quality of Life Research, 14(4), 971–980.CrossRefPubMed
26.
van Stel, H. F., & Buskens, E. (2006). Comparison of the SF-6D and the EQ-5D in patients with coronary heart disease. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4, 20–28.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Russell, A. S., Conner-Spady, B., Mintz, A., & Maksymowych, W. P. (2003). The responsiveness of generic health status measures as assessed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving infliximab. The Journal of Rheumatology, 30(5), 941–947.PubMed
28.
Conner-Spady, B., & Suarez-Almazor, M. E. (2003). Variation in the estimation of quality-adjusted life-years by different preference-based instruments. Medical Care, 41(7), 791–801.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Harrison, M. J., Davies, L. M., Bansback, N. J., McCoy, M. J., Verstappen, S. M., Watson, K., et al. (2009). The comparative responsiveness of the EQ-5D and SF-6D to change in patients with inflammatory arthritis. Quality of Life Research, 18(9), 1195–1205.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Johnson, J. A., & Coons, S. J. (1998). Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 in an adult US sample. Quality of Life Research, 7(2), 155–166.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Bharmal, M., Thomas, J., & II, I. (2006). Comparing the EQ-5D and the SF-6D descriptive systems to assess their ceiling effects in the US general population. Value in Health, 9(4), 262–271.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Kontodimopoulos, N., Pappa, E., Niakas, D., & Tountas, Y. (2007). Validity of SF-12 summary scores in a Greek general population. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 5, 55–63.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Borrell, C., Fernandez, E., Schiaffino, A., Benach, J., Rajmil, L., Villalbi, J. R., et al. (2001). Social class inequalities in the use of and access to health services in Catalonia, Spain: What is the influence of supplemental private health insurance? International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 13(2), 117–125.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Artazcoz, L., Benach, J., Borrell, C., & Cortes, I. (2005). Social inequalities in the impact of flexible employment on different domains of psychosocial health. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 59(9), 761–767.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Rue, M., Carles, M., Vilaprinyo, E., Martinez-Alonso, M., Espinas, J. A., Pla, R., et al. (2008). Dissemination of periodic mammography and patterns of use, by birth cohort, in Catalonia (Spain). BMC Cancer, 8, 336–346.CrossRefPubMed
36.
37.
Brooks, R., & The EuroQol Group. (1996). EuroQol: The current state of play. Health Policy, 37(1), 53–72.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Badia, X., Schiaffino, A., Alonso, J., & Herdman, M. (1998). Using the EuroQol 5-D in the Catalan general population: Feasibility and construct validity. Quality of Life Research, 7(4), 311–322.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Ware, J. E., Jr., Kosinski, M., Turner-Bowker, D. M., & Gandek, B. (2002). How to score version 2 of the SF-12 Health Survey (with a supplement documenting version 1). Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric, Inc.
40.
Vilagut, G., Ferrer, M., Rajmil, L., Rebollo, P., Permanyer-Miralda, G., Quintana, J. M., et al. (2005). El cuestionario de salud SF-36 español: una década de experiencia y nuevos desarrollos. Gaceta Sanitaria, 19(2), 135–150.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Alonso, J., Anto, J. M., & Moreno, C. (1990). Spanish version of the Nottingham Health Profile: Translation and preliminary validity. American Journal of Public Health, 80(6), 704–708.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Emery, C. F., Frid, D. J., Engebretson, T. O., Alonzo, A. A., Fish, A., Ferketich, A. K., et al. (2004). Gender differences in quality of life among cardiac patients. Psychosomatic Medicine, 66(2), 190–197.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Michelson, H., Bolund, C., Nilsson, B., & Brandberg, Y. (2000). Health-related quality of life measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30–reference values from a large sample of Swedish population. Acta Oncologica, 39(4), 477–484.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Power, M., Quinn, K., & Schmidt, S. (2005). Development of the WHOQOL-old module. Quality of Life Research, 14(10), 2197–2214.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Starfield, B. (2006). State of the art in research on equity in health. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 31(1), 11–32.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Domingo-Salvany, A., Regidor, E., Alonso, J., & Alvarez-Dardet, C. (2000). Una propuesta de medida de la clase social. Grupo de Trabajo de la Sociedad Espanola de Epidemiologia y de la Sociedad Española de Medicina de Familia y Comunitaria. Atencion Primaria, 25(5), 350–363.PubMed
47.
Goldberg, D. P., & Williams, P. (1988). A user’s guide to the General Health Questionnaire. London: Institute of Psychiatry.
48.
Gispert, R., Rajmil, L., Schiaffino, A., & Herdman, M. (2003). Sociodemographic and health-related correlates of psychiatric distress in a general population. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 38(12), 677–683.CrossRefPubMed
49.
50.
Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Estimation of a single effect size: Parametric and non parametric methods. In Statistical methods for meta-analysis (pp. 75–106). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
51.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Elrbaum Associates.
52.
Kazis, L. E., Anderson, J. J., & Meenan, R. F. (1989). Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Medical Care, 27(3 suppl), S178–S189.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Osborne, R. H., Hawthorne, G., Lew, E. A., & Gray, L. C. (2003). Quality of life assessment in the community-dwelling elderly: Validation of the assessment of quality of life (AQoL) instrument and comparison with the SF-36. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56(2), 138–147.CrossRefPubMed
54.
McHorney, C. A., & Tarlov, A. R. (1995). Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: Are available health status surveys adequate? Quality of Life Research, 4(4), 293–307.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Bansback, N., Sun, H., Guh, D. P., Li, X., Nosyk, B., Griffin, S., et al. (2008). Impact of the recall period on measuring health utilities for acute events. Health Economics, 17(12), 1413–1419.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Badia, X., Roset, M., Herdman, M., & Kind, P. (2001). A comparison of United Kingdom and Spanish general population time trade-off values for EQ-5D Health States. Medical Decision Making, 21(1), 7–16.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Mathers, C. D., Sadana, R., Salomon, J. A., Murray, C. J., & Lopez, A. D. (2001). Healthy life expectancy in 191 countries, 1999. The Lancet, 357(9269), 1685–1691.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Discriminative capacity of the EQ-5D, SF-6D, and SF-12 as measures of health status in population health survey
Auteurs
Oriol Cunillera
Ricard Tresserras
Luis Rajmil
Gemma Vilagut
Pilar Brugulat
Mike Herdman
Anna Mompart
Antonia Medina
Yolanda Pardo
Jordi Alonso
John Brazier
Montse Ferrer
Publicatiedatum
01-08-2010
Uitgeverij
Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 6/2010
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9639-z

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2010

Quality of Life Research 6/2010 Naar de uitgave

Letter to the Editor

Why we need response shift: an appeal to functionalism

OriginalPaper

Health-related quality of life in inflammatory bowel disease measured with the generic 15D instrument

OriginalPaper

Diabetes and its impact on health-related quality of life: a life table analysis

OriginalPaper

Quality of life after the menopause in Iran: a population study

OriginalPaper

Feasibility, reliability, and validity of the EQ-5D-Y: results from a multinational study

Original Paper

Development of the EQ-5D-Y: a child-friendly version of the EQ-5D