Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23815777›Full record

ReviewHealth and quality of life outcomes2013

Validity and responsiveness of EuroQol-5 dimension (EQ-5D) versus Short Form-6 dimension (SF-6D) questionnaire in chronic pain.

Marko Obradovic, Arun Lal, Hiltrud Liedgens

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 127 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
127citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
56.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02290223 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Patient Activation to Address Chronic Pain and Opioid Management in Primary Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorKaiser PermanenteRan2015 to 2017Enrolled376ConditionsChronic PainArmsBehavioral Based Treatment Model
NCT05359107 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

A Pragmatic Randomised Control Trial Comparing the Efficacy of the "Free From Pain Exercise Book" Versus "The Back Book" in Decreasing Back Pain in Adults Over 60 Years of Age.

TypeinterventionalSponsorTalita Cumi Ltd.Ran2023 to 2023Enrolled60ConditionsSarcopenia, Back Pain, ArthritisArms"The Free From Pain Exercise Book", "The Back Book"
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

127 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 232 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

67 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marko ObradovicGrunenthal GmbH, Zieglerstrasse 6, Aachen 52099, Germany.
Arun Lal
Hiltrud Liedgens
Grünenthal Group (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAssessments of health-related quality of life and particularly utility values are important components of health economic analyses. Several instruments have been developed to measure utilities. However no consensus has emerged regarding the most appropriate instrument within a therapeutic area such as chronic pain. The study compared two instruments - EQ-5D and SF-6D - for their performance and validity in patients with chronic pain.

methodsPooled data from three randomised, controlled clinical trials with two active treatment groups were used. The included patients suffered from osteoarthritis knee pain or low back pain. Differences between the utility measures were compared in terms of mean values at baseline and endpoint, Bland-Altman analysis, correlation between the dimensions, construct validity, and responsiveness.

resultsThe analysis included 1977 patients, most with severe pain on the Numeric Rating Scale. The EQ-5D showed a greater mean change from baseline to endpoint compared with the SF-6D (0.43 to 0.58 versus 0.59 to 0.64). Bland-Altman analysis suggested the difference between two measures depended on the health status of a patient. Spearmans rank correlation showed moderate correlation between EQ-5D and SF-6D dimensions. Construct validity showed both instruments could differentiate between patient subgroups with different severities of adverse events and analgesic efficacies but larger differences were detected with the EQ-5D. Similarly, when anchoring the measures to a disease-specific questionnaire - Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) - both questionnaires could differentiate between WOMAC severity levels but the EQ-5D showed greater differences. Responsiveness was also higher with the EQ-5D and for the subgroups in which improvements in health status were expected or when WOMAC severity level was reduced the improvements with EQ-5D were higher than with SF-6D.

conclusionsThis analysis showed that the mean EQ-5D scores were lower than mean SF-6D scores in patients with chronic pain. EQ-5D seemed to have higher construct validity and responsiveness in these patients.

Indexed as

Health Status IndicatorsQuality of LifeAgedChronic PainFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReproducibility of ResultsStatistics, NonparametricSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID23815777
PMCPMC3722016
OpenAlexW2105957182

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.