Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients

Medical Care

Volumn 45, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 259-263

  Pickard, A Simon ^a,b   De Leon, Maria C ^a   Kohlmann, Thomas ^c   Cella, David ^d   Rosenbloom, Sarah ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^b HINES VA HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GREIFSWALD   (Germany)

^d NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cancer; EQ 5D; FACT; Health related quality of life; Psychometrics

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DEPRESSION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM; PAIN; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SELF CARE;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; DEPRESSION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS; PAIN; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SELF CARE;

EID: 33847200473     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000254515.63841.81     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Rabin R, De Charro F, Szende A. Introduction. In: Szende A, Williams A, eds. Measuring Self-Reported Population Health: an International Perspective Based on EQ-5D. Hungary: SpringMed Publishing Ltd.; 2004.
2. Krabbe PFM, Stouthard MEA, Essink-Bot M, et al. The effect of adding a cognitive dimension to the EuroQol multiattribute health-status classification system. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:293-301.
3. Rabin R, De Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med. 2001;33:337-343.
4. Weng L-J. Impact of the number of response categories and anchor labels on coefficient alpha and test-retest reliability. Educ Psychol Measurement. 2004;64:956-972.
5. Van Agt H, Bonsel G. The number of levels in the descriptive system. In: Kind P, Brooks R, Rabin R, eds. EQ-5D Concepts and Methods: A Developmental History. Netherlands: Springer; 2005.
6. Janssen MF, Haagsma JA, Bonsel GJ. Comparing the standard EQ-5D three level system with a five level version. In: Pickard AS, ed. 22nd Scientific Plenary Meeting of the EuroQol Group; 2005.
7. Webster K, Cella D, Yost K. The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Measurement System: properties, applications, and interpretation. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:79.
8. Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, et al. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol. 1982;5:649-655.
9. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Jaeshke R. How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. In: Spilker B, ed. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1996.
10. Hillers TK, Guyatt GH, Oldridge N, et al. Quality of life after myocardial infarction. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47:1287-1296.
11. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE. Testing for the equality of two correlations. In: Kugushev A, ed. Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company; 1998.
12. Hays RD, Anderson R, Revicki D. Psychometric consideration in evaluating health-related quality of life measures. Qual Life Res. 1993;2:441-449.
13. Wright BD, Masters GN. Rating Scale Analysis. Chicago, IL: MESA Press; 1982.
14. Smith EV Jr. Evidence for the reliability of measures and validity of measure interpretation: a Rasch measurement perspective. J Appl Meas. 2001;2:281-311.
15. Linacre JM, Wright BD. Summaries of persons and items. A User's Guide to Winsteps: Rasch-model computer program. Chicago, IL: MESA Press; 2001.
16. Bond TG, Fox CM. Rasch Model Assessment. Applying the Rasch model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.; 2001;206-209.
17. Günter OH, Matschinger H, König H-H. An item response theory model analysis to evaluate the dimensionality of the EQ-5D across six countries (abstract #1656). Available at http://www.isoqol.org/2006AbstractsBook.pdf. Accessed October 30, 2006.
18. Shannon CE, Weaver W. A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical J. 1948;27:379-423.
19. Beals M, Gross L, Harrell S. Diversity Indices: Shannon's H and E. Available at: http://www.tiem.utk.edu/~gross/bioed/bealsmodules/shannonDI.html. Accessed on August 18, 2006.
20. Johnson JA, Pickard AS. Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 health surveys in a general population survey in Alberta, Canada. Med Care. 2000;38:115-121.
21. Johnson JA, Coons SJ. Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 in an adult US sample. Qual Life Res. 1998;7:155-166.