ArticlePloS one2023
Exploring differences and similarities of EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L and WHOQOL-OLD in recipients of aged care services in Germany.
Article in PloS one, 2023. 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.
- Comparative study on eating habits and health of single-person and multi-person households.PloS one · 2025Article
- Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and SF-6Dv2 in patients with late-onset Pompe disease.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
European countries more than ever face shifts towards aging societies with accompanying challenges for health and aged care services. Economic evaluation has mainly relied on health measures such as EQ-5D across populations and conditions. We want to know how well the EQ-5D performs in the target population to avoid bias to the disadvantage of older adults and care-dependents. Therefore, we aim to explore differences and similarities of EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in comparison to the old-age specific WHOQOL-OLD instrument in a sample of older adults receiving aged care services. We collected data from n = 329 older adults (≥65 years) receiving aged care services in Germany; the majority was at least 80 years and had varying care needs. We assessed instruments' feasibility, test-retest reliability, instruments' association and sensitivity to known-group differences. In terms of feasibility and test-retest reliability both EQ-5D versions performed better than the WHOQOL-OLD. All measures differentiated well between groups based on aspects of general health and care levels. The analysis of relationship between measures indicated that EQ-5D and WHOQOL-OLD assess partially overlapping, but distinct constructs. We found no clear evidence of superiority of either EQ-5D version over the other. The EQ-5D-5L performed better in terms of test-retest reliability and stronger correlations with WHOQOL-OLD facets. We conclude that using the WHOQOL-OLD alongside EQ-5D in this sample added further information on different aspects of quality of life.
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.