ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2026
Examining the face validity of the EQ-HWB-9 in dementia: caregiver interpretation across "Today" and "7-Day" recall periods.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to assess the face validity of the EQ Health and Wellbeing 9 (EQ-HWB-9) for use as a proxy by informal caregivers of community-dwelling people living with dementia (PlwD). It explored how caregivers understand and interpret the EQ-HWB-9 items when using two different recall periods (today vs. 7-days).
methodsQualitative interviews were conducted with 73 informal caregivers of PlwD in Germany. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two recall period groups of the EQ-HWB-9 ("today" vs. "7 days"), and underwent an interview, designed to evaluate the appropriateness of the EQ-HWB-9. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using qualitative content analysis.
resultsCaregivers were, on average, 70.6 years old and mainly female (72.6%). Most caregivers found the EQ-HWB-9 acceptable, highlighting its broad health coverage, clear structure, and suitability of the five-point response scale. Criticisms included the brevity and insufficient depth to capture the PlwD's health status fully. Caregivers tended to focus on observable aspects, such as daily activities, concentration, and mobility, while internal states, like loneliness, sadness, and anxiety, were more challenging to assess, often relying on indirect cues. The 7-day recall period was associated with lower adherence and more frequent deviations from recall instructions compared to the "Today" recall. Overall, caregivers adhered well to the instructed proxy-proxy perspective but reported uncertainty in selecting the most appropriate responses.
conclusionsThe EQ-HWB-9 is generally acceptable and feasible for proxy assessments in PlwD. However, challenges regarding recall periods, proxy interpretation, and response certainty require further investigation.
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.