4.4 Article

Validation and comparison of the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L instruments in Greece

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS
Volume 18, Issue 4, Pages 519-531

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10198-016-0807-0

Keywords

EQ-5D; Health-related quality of life; Psychometrics; Validity; Greece

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To validate and compare the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L with the EQ-5D-5L classification systems in Greece. Participants (n = 2279) over 40 years old, sampled from the greater area of Athens using a multistage stratified quota sampling method, completed both EQ-5D versions, while information was also collected on socio-demographics and health-related characteristics. The EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L were evaluated in terms of agreement, ceiling effects, redistribution and inconsistency, informativity, and convergent and known-groups validity. The agreement between the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L was high (ICC = 0.85). Ceiling effects decreased significantly in the EQ-5D-5L in all domains (P < 0.001), with usual activities (-21.4 %) and self-care (-20.1 %) showing the highest absolute and anxiety/depression the highest relative reduction (-32.46 %). Inconsistency was low (5.7 %). The increase in prevalence of problems was larger than the decrease in their severity, resulting in a lower mean health utility for the EQ-5D-5L. Overall absolute and relative informativity improved by 70.5 % and 16.4 %, respectively, in the EQ-5D-5L. Both instruments exhibited good convergent and known-groups validity, with evidence of a considerably better convergent performance and discriminatory ability of the EQ-5D-5L. Both EQ-5D versions demonstrated good construct validity and had consistent redistribution. The EQ-5D-5L system may be preferable to the EQ-5D-3L, as it exhibited superior performance in terms of lower ceiling effects, higher absolute and relative informativity, and improved convergent and known-groups validity efficiency.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available