4.5 Article

Testing a Swedish child-friendly pilot version of the EQ-5D instrument-initial results

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages 178-183

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckq042

Keywords

child health; EQ-5D; health-related quality of life; validity; Sweden

Funding

  1. Stockholm County Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: There is an increasing interest in studying health-related quality of life in children and adolescents. A Swedish child-friendly pilot version of the EQ-5D instrument has been developed. The aim of this article is to report on its assessment of feasibility and discriminative validity. Methods: A questionnaire with the child-friendly pilot version was addressed during a clinical examination to 260 children aged 8 years and 230 children aged 12 years. Comprehensibility and acceptability were investigated and feasibility was assessed according to missing and ambiguous answers. Discriminative validity was investigated by determining whether groups that were a priori known to differ in health status (by clinical and socio-demographic characteristics) were distinguished also by the percentage of reported problems on the five health dimensions and by visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. Results: Feasibility was supported for self-completion in the presence of an interviewer. Discriminative validity was supported as children with asthma or rhinitis, severe illness or handicap, having consulted health care during the past 3 months, overweight and obesity and children with a parent born outside the Nordic countries reported more problems and had lower VAS scores. Conclusions: The results of the initial testing of the Swedish child-friendly pilot version of the EQ-5D instrument indicate feasibility and discriminative validity. However, further research should explore alternative modes of administration and study design, and be performed in groups with a larger proportion with diseased children.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available