ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025
Differences in rating of health related quality of life on the EQ-5D-5 L between ethnic groups.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2025. 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.
- Association of Adverse Childhood Experiences With Health-Related Quality of Life and Quality-Adjusted Life-Years Among Adolescents in the United Kingdom: Findings From Two General Population Cohorts.Alpha psychiatry · 2026Article
- Independent associations between health-promoting behaviours, healthcare access, and health-related quality of life in Singapore.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo examine whether ratings on each of the five dimensions of the EQ-5D-5L vary across ethnic groups after adjusting for health conditions and other relevant covariates.
methodsWe applied the Hierarchical Ordered Probit (HOPIT) model to the EQ-5D-5L responses of 2,642,805 participants in nine pooled cross-sectional waves of the General Practice Patient Survey in England. The model separated latent health, determined by health conditions, from reporting behaviour, which was assumed to be influenced by socio-demographic characteristics, recent healthcare use, and healthcare access.
resultsWe find systematic differences in rating behaviour between five ethnic groups. Across all five dimensions, respondents from White ethnic backgrounds were most likely to choose middle severity levels. Respondents from Asian and Black ethnic backgrounds were more likely than those from White backgrounds to report the less severe levels for Anxiety/Depression and Usual Activities. Respondents from Other ethnic backgrounds not classified within the four main categories were more likely to choose the lowest and highest severity levels for Anxiety/Depression.
conclusionOur results suggest important heterogeneity in self-rating of health and highlights the importance of adjusting for reporting heterogeneity in applications of this measure. Where such adjustments are not feasible, alternative approaches such as sensitivity analyses to test the impact of differential reporting should be considered.
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.