Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35538178›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2023

Comparing EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in measuring the HRQoL burden of 4 health conditions in China.

Guizhi Weng, Yanming Hong, Nan Luo, Clara Mukuria, Jie Jiang, Zhihao Yang, Sha Li

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. An international compendium of health state utilities in people with HIV: a systematic review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Validating the Well-Being of Older People (WOOP) Instrument in China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  16. 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

7 authors.

Guizhi WengCollege of Pharmacy, Jinan University, 601 West Huangpu avenue, 510632, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7602-0222
Yanming HongCollege of Pharmacy, Jinan University, 601 West Huangpu avenue, 510632, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Nan LuoSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Clara MukuriaSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Jie JiangCollege of Pharmacy, Jinan University, 601 West Huangpu avenue, 510632, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Zhihao YangCollege of Pharmacy, Jinan University, 601 West Huangpu avenue, 510632, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China. Zhihao_yang_cn@126.com.
Sha LiCollege of Pharmacy, Jinan University, 601 West Huangpu avenue, 510632, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China. tlisha@jnu.edu.cn.

Funding

natural science foundation of guangdong province No. 2020A1515010990science and technology program of guangzhou, china No. 201704020198
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEQ-5D-3L has been used in the National Health Services Survey of China since 2008 to monitor population health. The five-level version of EQ-5D was developed, but there lacks evidence to support the use of five-level version of EQ-5D in China. This study was conducted to compare the measurement properties of both the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in quantifying health-related quality of life (HRQoL) burden for 4 different health conditions in China.

methodsParticipants from China were recruited to complete the 3L and 5L questionnaire via Internet. Quota was set to recruit five groups of individuals, with one group of individuals without any health condition and one group of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), HIV/AIDS, chronic Hepatitis B (CHB), or depression, respectively. The 3L and 5L were compared in terms of response distributions, percentages of reporting 'no problems', index value distributions, known-group validity and their relative efficiency.

resultsIn total, 500 individuals completed the online survey, including 140 healthy individuals, 122 individuals with hepatitis B, 107 with depression, 90 individuals with GAD and 101 with HIV/AIDS. 5L also had smoother and less clustered index value distributions. Healthy group showed different response distributions to the four condition groups. The percentage of reporting 'no problems' decreased significantly in the 5L in all domains (P < 0.01), especially in the pain/discomfort dimension (relative difference: 43.10%). Relative efficiency suggested that 5L had a higher absolute discriminatory power than the 3L version between healthy participant and the other 4 condition groups, especially for the HIV/AIDS group when the 3L results was not significant.

conclusionsThe 5L version may be preferable to the 3L, as it demonstrated superior performance with respect to higher sensitivity to mild health problems, better relative efficiency and responses and index value distributions.

Indexed as

Acquired Immunodeficiency SyndromeQuality of LifeChinaHealth StatusHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesChinaDisease burdenEQ-5D-3LEQ-5D-5LHealth-related quality of life

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.