Psychiatrische Praxis · 2006
[Discriminative ability, construct validity and sensitivity to change of the EQ-5D quality of life questionnaire in paranoid schizophrenia].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Konnopka Alexander, Günther Oliver H, Angermeyer Matthias C, König Hans-Helmut
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the discriminative ability, construct validity and sensitivity to change of the EQ-5D in paranoid schizophrenia (ICD-10 F20.0).
METHODS: Data of 408 patients was analyzed in a longitudinal study by comparing EQ-5D with SF-36, CGI-S, PANSS, and GAF.
RESULTS: EQ-5D showed considerable discriminative ability in the patient sample when compared to a representative population sample. If a measure used for comparison and a EQ-5D dimension were theoretically corresponding, the measure's mean score differed significantly between EQ-5D answer levels, with largest effect sizes for SF-36 scales (0.34<|d|<1.76), but rather small values for CGI-S, PANSS and GAF (|d|<0.5). EQ-5D VAS (mean 61.3) and German EQ-5D index (mean 0.84) showed rather moderate correlations with most other scales (0.18<|r|<0.62). ROC-analysis indicated a very low sensitivity to change of EQ VAS and German EQ-5D index (0.50<AUC<0.58).
CONCLUSIONS: Although focusing on physical problems, the EQ-5D seems to have reasonable discriminative ability and construct validity, but very low sensitivity to change.
METHODS: Data of 408 patients was analyzed in a longitudinal study by comparing EQ-5D with SF-36, CGI-S, PANSS, and GAF.
RESULTS: EQ-5D showed considerable discriminative ability in the patient sample when compared to a representative population sample. If a measure used for comparison and a EQ-5D dimension were theoretically corresponding, the measure's mean score differed significantly between EQ-5D answer levels, with largest effect sizes for SF-36 scales (0.34<|d|<1.76), but rather small values for CGI-S, PANSS and GAF (|d|<0.5). EQ-5D VAS (mean 61.3) and German EQ-5D index (mean 0.84) showed rather moderate correlations with most other scales (0.18<|r|<0.62). ROC-analysis indicated a very low sensitivity to change of EQ VAS and German EQ-5D index (0.50<AUC<0.58).
CONCLUSIONS: Although focusing on physical problems, the EQ-5D seems to have reasonable discriminative ability and construct validity, but very low sensitivity to change.