Literature DB >> 26756822

Response-Scale Heterogeneity in the EQ-5D.

Rachel J Knott1, Nicole Black1, Bruce Hollingsworth2, Paula K Lorgelly1.   

Abstract

This paper discusses two types of response-scale heterogeneity, which may impact upon the EQ-5D. Response-scale heterogeneity in reporting occurs when individuals systematically differ in their use of response scales when responding to self-assessments. This type of heterogeneity is widely observed in relation to other self-assessed measures but is often overlooked with regard to the EQ-5D. Analogous to this, preference elicitation involving the EQ-5D could be subject to a similar type of heterogeneity, where variations across respondents may occur in the interpretations of the levels (response categories) being valued. This response-scale heterogeneity in preference elicitation may differ from variations in preferences for health states, which have been observed in the literature. This paper explores what these forms of response-scale heterogeneity may mean for the EQ-5D and the potential implications for researchers who rely on the instrument as a measure of health and quality of life. We identify situations where they are likely to be problematic and present potential avenues for overcoming these issues.
Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords:  EQ-5D; anchoring vignettes; differential item functioning; multi-attribute utility instruments; preference heterogeneity; reporting heterogeneity; response-scale heterogeneity

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26756822     DOI: 10.1002/hec.3313

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ        ISSN: 1057-9230            Impact factor:   3.046


  5 in total

1.  Predictors of self-reported health-related quality of life according to the EQ-5D-Y in chronically ill children and adolescents with asthma, diabetes, and juvenile arthritis: longitudinal results.

Authors:  Christiane Otto; Dana Barthel; Fionna Klasen; Sandra Nolte; Matthias Rose; Ann-Katrin Meyrose; Marcus Klein; Ute Thyen; Ulrike Ravens-Sieberer
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-11-30       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  The relationship of neighbourhood-level material and social deprivation with health-related quality of life.

Authors:  Hilary Short; Fatima Al Sayah; Arto Ohinmaa; Markus Lahtinen; Jeffrey A Johnson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on patient-reported outcome measures in Dutch hip and knee arthroplasty patients.

Authors:  Joshua M Bonsel; Lichelle Groot; Abigael Cohen; Jan A N Verhaar; Maaike G J Gademan; Anneke Spekenbrink-Spooren; Gouke J Bonsel; Max Reijman
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2022-10-14       Impact factor: 3.925

4.  Are preferences over health states informed?

Authors:  M Karimi; J Brazier; S Paisley
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 3.186

5.  The association between depressive symptoms and self-reported sleep difficulties among college students: Truth or reporting bias?

Authors:  Zhiyong Huang; Fabrice Kämpfen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.