Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30185193›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2018

Quality of life in older adults following a hip fracture: an empirical comparison of the ICECAP-O and the EQ-5D-3 L instruments.

Rachel Milte, Maria Crotty, Michelle D Miller, Craig Whitehead, Julie Ratcliffe

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
12.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. ICECAP-O, the current state of play: a systematic review of studies reporting the psychometric properties and use of the instrument over the decade since its publication.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Systematic review of health utility losses from injuries and violence.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Capability instruments in economic evaluations of health-related interventions: a comparative review of the literature.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2020
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rachel MilteNutrition and Dietetics, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia. Rachel.milte@unisa.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7533-6260
Maria CrottyRehabilitation, Aged, and Extended Care, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Michelle D MillerNutrition and Dietetics, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Craig WhiteheadRehabilitation, Aged, and Extended Care, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Julie RatcliffeInstitute for Choice, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide SA, SA, 5001, Australia.
Flinders University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this study was to empirically compare the performance of two generic preference based quality of life instruments, EQ-5D-3 L (with a health and physical function focus) and ICECAP-O (with a wellbeing and capability focus), in a population of older Australians following hip fracture.

methodsOlder adults or their family member proxies (in cases of severe cognitive impairment) following surgery to repair a fractured hip were invited to take part in this cross sectional study. Inclusion criteria included an age of 60 years or older, confirmed falls-related hip fracture and those receiving current palliative care or consented to other research studies were excluded. 87 participants completed the ICECAP-O and EQ-5D-3 L instruments between one and three weeks post-surgery.

resultsFor the hip fracture population, the mean ICECAP-O score was 0.639 (SD 0.206, n = 82) and the mean EQ-5D-3 L utility score was 0.545 (SD 0.251, n = 87). There was a statistically significant positive correlation between the ICECAP-O and EQ-5D-3 L scores (r = 0.529, p = < 0.001).

conclusionsStudy findings indicate significant impairments in quality of life post hip fracture. In multiple regression analyses, age and health-related QoL (measured by the EQ-5D) were significant determinants of ICECAP-O scores, while proxy respondent status, age, and capability-related QoL (measured by the ICECAP-O) were significant determinants of EQ-5D scores. Approaches to measuring and valuing quality of life in this sample, should consider the target domains of the intervention in their choice of instrument. Studies aiming to measure the impact of interventions targeting broader domains of wellbeing and QoL should consider including a broader measure of QoL in conjunction with a HRQoL measure.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingAccidental FallsAgedAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHip FracturesHumansMaleProxyQuality of LifeResidence CharacteristicsSurveys and QuestionnairesHip fracturesPatient reported outcome measuresQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID30185193
PMCPMC6126006
OpenAlexW2891907527

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.