ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2025
Psychometric testing of the ICECAP-A in patients with coeliac disease: a comparative analysis with EQ-5D-5L.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A) in patients with coeliac disease (CD) and compare its performance with EQ-5D-5L.
methodsAn online cross-sectional survey was conducted among 312 adult patients with CD in Hungary, who completed both the ICECAP-A and EQ-5D-5L. Psychometric properties assessed included distributional characteristics, convergent validity with the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS), Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), and known-group validity.
resultsMean age was 35.8 years (range: 18-80), and 70.2% were female. On the ICECAP-A, 51% (attachment) to 81% (stability) of patients reported limitations, while on the EQ-5D-5L, 2% (self-care) to 41% (pain/discomfort) reported problems. Ceiling effect was not observed for the ICECAP-A (6.7%), but reached 38.8% for EQ-5D-5L. The mean index value was 0.85 for the ICECAP-A and 0.92 for the EQ-5D-5L. ICECAP-A correlated strongly with SWLS (r=0.698), moderately with EQ-5D-5L (r=0.551) and weakly with GSRS (r=-0.284). Both the ICECAP-A and EQ-5D-5L were able to differentiate between known groups based on general health status and relevant clinical variables (e.g. symptoms, comorbidities, duration on gluten-free diet and adherence to it); however, the EQ-5D-5L typically showed somewhat larger effect sizes.
conclusionThis study is the first to validate ICECAP-A in patients with CD, demonstrating good psychometric performance, including strong convergent and known-group validity. Its ability to capture broader aspects of well-being supports its use as a valuable tool in outcome assessments for this patient population.
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.