Evaluating the discriminatory power of EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 in a US general population survey using Shannon's indices

62Citations
Citations of this article
53Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare quantitatively the discriminatory power of the EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 in terms of absolute and relative informativity, using Shannon's indices. Methods: Q-5D and HUI2/3 data completed by a sample of the general adult US population (N = 3,691) were used. Five dimensions allowed head-to-head comparison of informativity: Mobility/Ambulation; Anxiety/Depression/Emotion; Pain/Discomfort (EQ-5D; HUI2; HUI3); Self-Care (EQ-5D; HUI2); and Cognition (HUI2; HUI3). Shannon's index and Shannon's Evenness index were used to assess absolute and relative informativity, both by dimension and by instrument as a whole. Results: Absolute informativity was highest for HUI3, with the largest differences in Pain/Discomfort and Cognition. Relative informativity was highest for EQ-5D, with the largest differences in Mobility/Ambulation and Anxiety/Depression/Emotion. Absolute informativity by instrument was consistently highest for HUI3 and lowest for EQ-5D, and relative informativity was highest for EQ-5D and lowest for HUI3. Discussion: erformance in terms of absolute and relative informativity of the common dimensions of the three instruments varies over dimensions. Several dimensions are suboptimal: Pain/Discomfort (EQ-5D) seems too crude with only 3 levels, and the level descriptions of Ambulation (HUI3) and Self-Care (HUI2) could be improved. In absence of a formal measure, Shannon's indices provide useful measures for assessing discriminatory power of utility instruments. © 2007 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Janssen, M. F., Birnie, E., & Bonsel, G. J. (2007). Evaluating the discriminatory power of EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 in a US general population survey using Shannon’s indices. Quality of Life Research, 16(5), 895–904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-006-9160-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free