ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2022
Comparison of EQ-5D-3L and 5L versions following operative fixation of closed ankle fractures.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validity of EQ-5D-5L breathing and cognition bolt-ons in non-hospitalized patients after COVID-19.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Comparison of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L instruments in patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo undertake the first testing and comparison of measurement properties for the EuroQol EQ-5D-3L and 5L in patients with ankle problems.
methodsThe cross-sectional postal survey of 959 patients aged ≥ 18 years, who underwent surgical treatment (ORIF) for unstable and closed ankle fractures in Eastern Norway. Both the EQ-5D-3L and 5L were included in a postal questionnaire in 2015, 3-6 years post surgery. Missing data, floor and ceiling effects, and response consistency were assessed. Tests of validity included comparisons with scores for the SF-36 and widely used ankle-specific instruments. The 5L version was assessed for test-retest reliability.
resultsThere were 567 (59%) respondents; 501 completed both versions and 182 (61%) the 5L retest questionnaire. The 5L outperformed the 3L in tests of data quality and classification efficiency. Correlations with scores for other instruments largely met expectations, those for the 5L being slightly higher. All 5L scores had acceptable levels of reliability. For the 5L index, the smallest detectable differences for group and individual comparisons were 0.02 and 0.20, respectively.
conclusionThe 5L outperformed the 3L in terms of data quality, number of health states assessed and tests of validity. The 5L is recommended in research and other applications following surgery for ankle fracture but further testing including responsiveness to change is recommended at clinically relevant follow-up periods.
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.