BACKGROUND: Five health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) indexes--EQ-5D, HUI2, HUI3, QWB-SA, and SF-6D--are each used to assign community-based utility scores to health states, although these scores differ. OBJECTIVE: The authors transform these indexes to a common scale to understand their interrelationships. METHODS: Data were from the National Health Measurement Study, a telephone survey of 3844 US adults. The 5 indexes were analyzed using item response theory analysis to estimate scores on an underlying construct of summary health, theta. Unidimensionality was evaluated using nonlinear principal components analysis. Index scores were plotted against the estimated scores on the common underlying construct. In addition, scores on the Health and Activities Limitation Index (HALex), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Healthy Days questions, and self-rated health on a 5-category scale ranging from excellent to poor were plotted. RESULTS: SF-6D and QWB-SA are nearly linear across the range of but with a shallow slope; EQ-5D, HUI2, and HUI3 are linear with a steep slope from low (poor health) into midrange of , then approximately linear with a less steep slope for higher (health just below to well above average), although the inflection points differ by index. CONCLUSION: Simple linear functions may serve as crosswalks among these indexes only for lower health states, albeit with low precision. Ceiling effects make crosswalks among most of the indexes ill specified above a certain level of health. Although each index measures generic health on a utility scale, these indexes are not identical but are relatively simply, if imprecisely, related.
BACKGROUND: Five health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) indexes--EQ-5D, HUI2, HUI3, QWB-SA, and SF-6D--are each used to assign community-based utility scores to health states, although these scores differ. OBJECTIVE: The authors transform these indexes to a common scale to understand their interrelationships. METHODS: Data were from the National Health Measurement Study, a telephone survey of 3844 US adults. The 5 indexes were analyzed using item response theory analysis to estimate scores on an underlying construct of summary health, theta. Unidimensionality was evaluated using nonlinear principal components analysis. Index scores were plotted against the estimated scores on the common underlying construct. In addition, scores on the Health and Activities Limitation Index (HALex), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Healthy Days questions, and self-rated health on a 5-category scale ranging from excellent to poor were plotted. RESULTS: SF-6D and QWB-SA are nearly linear across the range of but with a shallow slope; EQ-5D, HUI2, and HUI3 are linear with a steep slope from low (poor health) into midrange of , then approximately linear with a less steep slope for higher (health just below to well above average), although the inflection points differ by index. CONCLUSION: Simple linear functions may serve as crosswalks among these indexes only for lower health states, albeit with low precision. Ceiling effects make crosswalks among most of the indexes ill specified above a certain level of health. Although each index measures generic health on a utility scale, these indexes are not identical but are relatively simply, if imprecisely, related.
Authors: Chris Blanchard; David Feeny; Jeffrey L Mahon; Robert Bourne; Cecil Rorabeck; Larry Stitt; Susan Webster-Bogaert Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Dennis G Fryback; Nancy Cross Dunham; Mari Palta; Janel Hanmer; Jennifer Buechner; Dasha Cherepanov; Shani A Herrington; Ron D Hays; Robert M Kaplan; Theodore G Ganiats; David Feeny; Paul Kind Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Janel Hanmer; Dasha Cherepanov; Mari Palta; Robert M Kaplan; David Feeny; Dennis G Fryback Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2015-08-27 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: David Feeny; Karen Spritzer; Ron D Hays; Honghu Liu; Theodore G Ganiats; Robert M Kaplan; Mari Palta; Dennis G Fryback Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2011-10-18 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Liam M Hannan; David G T Whitehurst; Stirling Bryan; Jeremy D Road; Christine F McDonald; David J Berlowitz; Mark E Howard Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-03-02 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Wenjia Chen; Larry D Lynd; J Mark FitzGerald; Carlo A Marra; Roxanne Rousseau; Mohsen Sadatsafavi Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Benjamin M Craig; Bryce B Reeve; Paul M Brown; David Cella; Ron D Hays; Joseph Lipscomb; A Simon Pickard; Dennis A Revicki Journal: Value Health Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 5.725