Articlegold2003

Do English and Chinese EQ-5D versions demonstrate measurement equivalence? An exploratory study.

Nan Luo · Ling-Huo Chew · Kok‐Yong Fong · Dow-Rhoon Koh · Swee‐Cheng Ng · Kam Hon Yoon +3 more

69 citations0/0 files storedHealth and Quality of Life Outcomes

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life Psychometric Methodologies and Testing Health Education and Validation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although multiple language versions of health-related quality of life instruments are often used interchangeably in clinical research, the measurement equivalence of these versions (especially using alphabet vs pictogram-based languages) has rarely been assessed. We therefore investigated the measurement equivalence of English and Chinese versions of the EQ-5D, a widely used utility-based outcome instrument. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, either EQ-5D version was administered to consecutive outpatients with rheumatic diseases. Measurement equivalence of EQ-5D item responses and utility and visual analog scale (EQ-VAS) scores between these versions was assessed using multiple regression models (with and without adjusting for potential confounding variables), by comparing the 95% confidence interval (95%CI) of score differences between these versions with pre-defined equivalence margins. An equivalence margin defined a magnitude of score differences (10% and 5% of entire score ranges for item responses and utility/EQ-VAS scores, respectively) which was felt to be clinically unimportant. RESULTS: Sixty-six subjects completed the English and 48 subjects the Chinese EQ-5D. The 95%CI of the score differences between these versions overlapped with but did not fall completely within pre-defined equivalence margins for 4 EQ-5D items, utility and EQ-VAS scores. For example, the 95%CI of the adjusted score difference between these EQ-5D versions was -0.14 to +0.03 points for utility scores and -11.6 to +3.3 points for EQ-VAS scores (equivalence margins of -0.05 to +0.05 and -5.0 to +5.0 respectively). CONCLUSION: These data provide promising evidence for the measurement equivalence of English and Chinese EQ-5D versions.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 69 citations exist upstream.

References

1996EuroQol: the current state of play 2001EQ-SD: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group 1989Measurement of health status 1997Modeling Valuations for EuroQol Health States 1996Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials 1998Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey 2000Item Response Theory and Health Outcomes Measurement in the 21st Century 1997Measuring health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis: validity, responsiveness and reliability of EuroQol (EQ-5D)

Cited by

2008The Association of Body Mass Index with Health-Related Quality of Life: An Exploratory Study in a Multiethnic Asian Population 2023Randomised comparison of online interviews versus face-to-face interviews to value health states 2014Are social security policies for Chinese landless farmers really effective on health in the process of Chinese rapid urbanization? a study on the effect of social security policies for Chinese landless farmers on their health-related quality of life

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.