ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2024
Comparison of the Measurement Properties of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 in COVID-19 Patients in China.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health-related quality of life in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of EQ-5D studies.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Pooled it
- Validation of the health-related quality of life instrument with 8 items for assessing health-related quality of life in patients with oropharyngeal cancer: a comparison with the EQ-5D-5L.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Article
- Assessing the reliability and responsiveness of the SF-6Dv2 and comparing its validity to the EQ-5D-5L among colorectal cancer patients in China.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThere are limited studies comparing the health utility values of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 within the same patient cohorts. The widespread transmission and recurring infections associated with Omicron variants amid the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted in substantial health detriments and increased utilisation of health care resources. This highlights the crucial need to assess the loss in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Therefore, this study aims to compare the ceiling and floor effects, agreement, correlation and responsiveness between EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 based on COVID-19 patients during the Omicron outbreak in China.
methodsWe recruited 694 COVID-19 patients across mainland China to participant in an online questionnaire survey from January to February 2023. The questionnaire encompassed queries concerning the sociodemographic and health details of the participants, who were requested to recollect their health status during and after experiencing COVID-19 using the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 questionnaires. Epanechnikov kernel density plots were used to visualise the ceiling and floor effects for both instruments. Agreement was assessed by Bland-Altman graph and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Correlation was evaluated using linear regression, Pearson's correlation and Spearman's correlation. The standardised response mean (SRM) and relative efficiency (RE) were used to examine the responsiveness of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 at detecting the health improvement after COVID-19 infection and the difference in dichotomous health indicators.
resultsIn total, 648 valid responses from patients aged 35.6 ± 15.0 years were involved in analysis. The EQ-5D-5L utility indices were 0.58 ± 0.33 and 0.92 ± 0.14 during and after COVID-19 infection, respectively, which were significantly higher than indices of the SF-6Dv2 utility (0.43 ± 0.31 and 0.81 ± 0.19, p < 0.001). A ceiling effect of EQ-5D-5L larger than that of SF-6Dv2 was observed during COVID-19 infection (49.5% vs 21.6%). Intraclass correlation coefficients between EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 during and after COVID-19 infection were 0.69 and 0.55, respectively. The utility indices of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 were highly correlated, with Pearson's correlation coefficients of 0.76 and 0.70 (p < 0.001) during and after COVID-19 infection, respectively. The spearman's correlations were moderate to high between dimensions of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 (p < 0.01). Both EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 were responsive to detect health improvement after COVID-19 and the differences in dichotomous health indicators.
conclusionsThe utility indices generated by EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 in COVID-19 patients demonstrate strong correlation and responsiveness. However, the agreement between these two instruments does not reach a satisfactory level. Consequently, these two measures cannot be used interchangeably. In situations where apprehensions about ceiling effects affecting outcome measurement arise, it is advisable to consider SF-6Dv2 as a preferable outcome measure for studies on patients with COVID-19.
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.