ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2018
The feasibility of using the EQ-5D-3L with adults with mild to moderate learning disabilities within a randomized control trial: a qualitative evaluation.
Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcome measures for economic evaluations and cost-effectiveness analyses of interventions for people with intellectual disabilities: A methodological systematic review.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2023Pooled it
- Aphasia-specific or generic outcomes? a comparison of two health-related quality of life instruments for economic evaluations of aphasia treatments.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Comparing the measurement properties of the EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-3L in a general population sample of adults.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Redesigning trials to be inclusive of people with a learning disability-a practical example.Trials · 2026Article
- Adapting the EQ-5D-3L for adults with mild to moderate learning disabilities.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2024Article
- Health Service Utilisation of People Living with Psychosis: Validity of Self-report Compared with Administrative Data in a Randomised Controlled Trial.Applied health economics and health policy · 2024Article
- Using mobile health to encourage physical activity in individuals with intellectual disability: a pilot mixed methods feasibility study.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2023Article
- Access to health care for older people with intellectual disability: a modelling study to explore the cost-effectiveness of health checks.BMC public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn trials incorporating a health economic evaluation component, reliable validated measures for health-related quality of life (HRQOL) are essential. The EQ-5D is the preferred measure for cost-effectiveness analysis in UK trials. This paper presents a qualitative evaluation of the use of the EQ-5D-3L in a feasibility randomised control trial with participants who had a mild- to moderate learning disability and type 2 diabetes.
methodsResearchers administered the EQ-5D-3L to 82 participants at baseline and 77 at follow-up. After each interview, researchers rated the ease of administering the EQ-5D-3L and made free-text entries on the administration experience. For a subset of 16 interviews, researchers audio-recorded more detailed journal entries. Ease of administration data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Free-text responses were subject to a basic content analysis. The EQ-5D-3L-related journal entries were transcribed, coded and analysed thematically.
resultsOver half of participants were perceived to experience difficulty answering some or all of the items in the EQ-5D-3L (60% at baseline; 54% at follow-up). Analysis of the free-text entries and audio journals identified four themes that question the use of the EQ-5D-3L in this population. The first theme is related to observations of participant intellectual ability and difficulties, for example, in understanding the wording of the measure. Theme 2 is related to the normalisation of adjustments for impairments, which rendered the measure less sensitive in this population. Theme 3 is related to researcher adaptation and non-standard administration. An overarching fourth theme was identified in that people with learning disabilities were viewed as 'unreliable witnesses' by both researchers and supporters.
conclusionsIt is recommended that the EQ-5D-3L should not be used in isolation to assess health-related quality of life outcomes in trials research in adults with a learning disability. Further research is required to develop and evaluate a version of the EQ-5D appropriate for this population in trials research. It is unrealistic to expect that adjustments to the wording alone will deliver an appropriate measure: supporter or researcher involvement will almost always be required. This requirement needs to be factored into the development and administration guidelines of any new version of the EQ-5D for adults with a learning disability.
trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN41897033 [registered 21 January 2013].
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.