ArticlePharmacoEconomics2022
Is EQ-5D-5L Better Than EQ-5D-3L Over Time? A Head-to-Head Comparison of Responsiveness of Descriptive Systems and Value Sets from Nine Countries.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The EQ-5D-5L index as a measure of health-related quality of life in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Pooled it
- Economic Evaluation of the Addition of Vancomycin to Cefazolin Prophylaxis in Patients Undergoing Arthroplasty.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Trial
- A randomised equivalence study of the EQ-5D-5L Shona versions: evaluation of measurement equivalence between digital and paper formats.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Trial
- A comparison of health-related quality of life between continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and automated peritoneal dialysis in children with stage 5 chronic kidney disease in Thailand: a randomized controlled trial.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2025Trial
- Sensitivity to change of generic preference-based instruments (EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and HUI3) in the context of treatment for people with prescription-type opioid use disorder in Canada.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023Trial
- Measuring and Valuing Health Using EuroQol Instruments: New Developments 2025 and Beyond.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Review
- Validation and comparison of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv1 in myopic patients requiring corneal refractive surgery in China.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Article
- Patient Experiences Regarding Feasibility of Implementing Real-World EQ-5D Collection at an Oncology Centre in Ontario, Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Norms for the EQ-5D-5L among the general adult population in Alberta, Canada.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Mapping the Insomnia Severity Index Instrument to EQ-5D Health State Utilities: A United Kingdom Perspective.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the responsiveness of EQ-5D-3L (3L) with EQ-5D-5L (5L) descriptive systems and value sets in two independent samples (rehabilitation and stroke patients).
methodsDescriptive system results were compared cross-sectionally, and descriptive responsiveness was tested by calculating changed level responses ('moves') from baseline to follow-up, proportion of improved patients, Paretian Classification of Health Change (PCHC), and probability of superiority (PS). Responsiveness of values based on nine country-specific value sets was assessed by standardized response mean (SRM) and standardized effect size (SES). Relative efficiency of 5L over 3L was assessed by calculating ratios of the SRM and SES statistics.
resultsDescriptive comparisons confirmed earlier evidence and showed a consistent overestimation of health problems in 3L. Descriptive responsiveness improved with 5L in terms of moves per respondent, proportions of improved patients and PS, whereas PCHC showed mixed results. Better value responsiveness statistics were observed for 5L in rehabilitation patients for all value sets. In stroke patients, 3L showed better responsiveness statistics compared with 5L. Relative efficiency results were moderately to strongly better with 5L for rehabilitation, and slightly to moderately better with 3L for stroke.
conclusionsDescriptive results were the main driver of 3L-5L responsiveness differences. Responsiveness of 3L was influenced by the 'confined to bed' label and the overestimation bias of 3L, which affected all responsiveness results. This may impact quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) estimations, leading to over- or underestimations of QALYs gained, depending on the condition and condition severity. QALY calculations based on 5L data will result in more accurate estimates.
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.