ArticlePharmacoEconomics - open2026
Exploring the Sensitivity of Utilities Predicted by the EQ-5D, SF-6D, HUI3, 15D, AQoL-4D, and AQoL-8D Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments to SF-36 Dimensions.
Article in PharmacoEconomics - open, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMulti-attribute utility instruments (MAUIs) are commonly used in health economics to measure health-related quality of life (HRQoL), yet their sensitivity to different health domains varies. This study examines the sensitivity of six widely used MAUIs-EQ-5D, SF-6D, HUI3, 15D, AQoL-4D, and AQoL-8D-to the eight dimensions of the SF-36 survey.
methodsWe analyzed the associations between SF-36 dimensions and utility scores generated by each MAUI using regression models, focusing on the eight SF-36 domains as predictors. Our analyses used data from the Multi-Instrument Comparison (MIC) project, a cross-national project comprising 8022 respondents from Australia, Canada, Germany, Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States, including both general population participants and individuals with a range of chronic health conditions. The sensitivity of each instrument was further evaluated through simulations of health interventions targeting mental health, pain relief, stress management, and post-surgical recovery.
resultsThe analysis revealed distinct sensitivity patterns across instruments. The SF-6D and 15D were particularly sensitive to social and role-oriented domains, while EQ-5D and HUI3 demonstrated greater sensitivity to physical health dimensions, especially bodily pain and physical functioning. AQoL-4D and AQoL-8D showed strong sensitivity to mental health, indicating their suitability for mental health-focused interventions. Regression models identified mental health, bodily pain, and physical functioning as the primary predictors of utility scores across MAUIs. Simulation results further highlighted that mental health interventions were best captured by AQoL-8D and HUI3, while EQ-5D and HUI3 were most sensitive to pain-focused interventions.
conclusionsThe choice of MAUI significantly impacts observed HRQoL outcomes depending on the health domains most relevant to the intervention. This study underscores the need for careful instrument selection in HRQoL assessments to ensure alignment with specific health contexts. Future research should validate these sensitivity patterns across diverse populations and clinical applications to optimize MAUI selection in health economic evaluations.
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.