The EQ-5D and SF-36 achieved mixed results in the quantitative testing against psychometric criteria .
The qualitative analysis suggests this is because they provide a very limited coverage of themes identified by people with mental health problems .
BACKGROUND Generic preference-based measures of health like the EQ-5D and SF-6D ( ® ) are increasingly being used in economic evaluation and outcome assessment .
However , there are concerns as to whether or not these generic measures are appropriate for use in people with mental health problems .
OBJECTIVES The EQ-5D and SF-36 ( ® ) ( including its derivatives the SF-12 ( ® ) and SF-6D ) were assessed using the psychometric criteria of validity and responsiveness using quantitative and qualitative methods .
Another aim was to estimate mapping functions between the EQ-5D and SF-6D and condition-specific measures , where appropriate .
Assessing the empirical validity of alternative multi-attribute utility measures in the maternity context
Background Multi-attribute utility measures are preference-based health-related quality of life measures that have been developed to inform economic evaluations of health care interventions . The objective of this study was to compare the empirical validity of two multi-attribute utility measures ( EQ-5D and SF-6D ) based on hypothetical preferences in a large maternity population in Engl and . Methods Women who participated in a r and omised controlled trial of additional postnatal support provided by trained community support workers represented the study population for this investigation . The women were asked to complete the EQ-5D descriptive system ( which defines health-related quality of life in terms of five dimensions : mobility , self care , usual activities , pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression ) and the SF-36 ( which defines health-related quality of life , using 36 items , across eight dimensions : physical functioning , role limitations ( physical ) , social functioning , bodily pain , general health , mental health , vitality and role limitations ( emotional ) ) at six months postpartum . Their responses were converted into utility scores using the York A1 tariff set and the SF-6D utility algorithm , respectively . One-way analysis of variance was used to test the hypothetically-constructed preference rule that each set of utility scores differs significantly by self-reported health status ( categorised as excellent , very good , good , fair or poor ) . The degree to which EQ-5D and SF-6D utility scores reflected alternative dichotomous configurations of self-reported health status and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale score was tested using the relative efficiency statistic and receiver operating characteristic ( ROC ) curves . Results The mean utility score for the EQ-5D was 0.861 ( 95 % CI : 0.844 , 0.877 ) , whilst the mean utility score for the SF-6D was 0.809 ( 95 % CI : 0.796 , 0.822 ) , representing a mean difference in utility score of 0.052 ( 95 % CI : 0.040 , 0.064 ; p < 0.001 ) . Both measures demonstrated statistically significant differences between subjects who described their health status as excellent , very good , good , fair or poor ( p < 0.001 ) , as well as monotonically decreasing utility scores ( test for linear trend : p < 0.001 ) . The SF-6D was between 29.1 % and 423.6 % more efficient than the EQ-5D at detecting differences in self-reported health status , and between 129.8 % and 161.7 % more efficient at detecting differences in the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale score . In addition , the SF-6D generated higher area under the curve ( AUC ) scores generated by the ROC curves than the EQ-5D , indicating greater discriminatory power , although in all but one analysis the differences in AUC scores between the measures were not statistically significant . Conclusion This study provides evidence that the SF-6D is an empirically valid and efficient alternative multi-attribute utility measure to the EQ-5D , and is capable of discriminating between external indicators of maternal health
The EQ-5D and SF-36 achieved mixed results in the quantitative testing against psychometric criteria .
The qualitative analysis suggests this is because they provide a very limited coverage of themes identified by people with mental health problems .
BACKGROUND Generic preference-based measures of health like the EQ-5D and SF-6D ( ® ) are increasingly being used in economic evaluation and outcome assessment .
However , there are concerns as to whether or not these generic measures are appropriate for use in people with mental health problems .
OBJECTIVES The EQ-5D and SF-36 ( ® ) ( including its derivatives the SF-12 ( ® ) and SF-6D ) were assessed using the psychometric criteria of validity and responsiveness using quantitative and qualitative methods .
Another aim was to estimate mapping functions between the EQ-5D and SF-6D and condition-specific measures , where appropriate .