• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Predicting EQ-5D-US and SF-6D societal health state values from the Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire.从骨质疏松评估问卷预测 EQ-5D-US 和 SF-6D 社会健康状态值。
Osteoporos Int. 2012 Feb;23(2):723-32. doi: 10.1007/s00198-011-1619-9. Epub 2011 Apr 12.
2
Mapping the cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30 to the preference-based EQ-5D, SF-6D, and 15D instruments.将癌症特异性 EORTC QLQ-C30 映射到偏好加权 EQ-5D、SF-6D 和 15D 工具。
Value Health. 2009 Nov-Dec;12(8):1151-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00569.x. Epub 2009 Jun 25.
3
A comparison of utility measurement using EQ-5D and SF-6D preference-based generic instruments in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.类风湿关节炎患者使用 EQ-5D 和 SF-6D 偏好型通用量表进行效用测量的比较。
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2011 Jul-Aug;29(4):661-71. Epub 2011 Aug 31.
4
Using the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale to estimate health state utility values: mapping from the MSIS-29, version 2, to the EQ-5D and the SF-6D.使用多发性硬化症影响量表来估算健康状态效用值:从 MSIS-29 版本 2 到 EQ-5D 和 SF-6D 的映射。
Value Health. 2012 Dec;15(8):1084-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.07.007. Epub 2012 Nov 4.
5
Scale characteristics and mapping accuracy of the US EQ-5D, UK EQ-5D, and SF-6D in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.类风湿关节炎患者的 US EQ-5D、UK EQ-5D 和 SF-6D 的量表特征和映射准确性。
J Rheumatol. 2010 Aug 1;37(8):1615-25. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.100043. Epub 2010 Jun 15.
6
Exploring the validity of estimating EQ-5D and SF-6D utility values from the health assessment questionnaire in patients with inflammatory arthritis.探讨从健康评估问卷估计炎症性关节炎患者的 EQ-5D 和 SF-6D 效用值的有效性。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010 Feb 11;8:21. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-21.
7
A head-to-head comparison of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in Dutch patients with fractures visiting a Fracture Liaison Service.骨折联络服务就诊的荷兰骨折患者中 EQ-5D-5L 与 SF-6D 的头对头比较。
J Med Econ. 2022 Jan-Dec;25(1):829-839. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2022.2087409.
8
Mapping the FACT-G cancer-specific quality of life instrument to the EQ-5D and SF-6D.将 FACT-G 癌症特异性生活质量量表映射到 EQ-5D 和 SF-6D 上。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013 Dec 1;11:203. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-11-203.
9
Mapping the cancer-specific QLQ-C30 onto the generic EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in colorectal cancer patients.将癌症患者专用的 QLQ-C30 量表映射到通用的 EQ-5D-5L 和 SF-6D 量表上。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2019 Feb;19(1):89-96. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2018.1517046. Epub 2018 Sep 3.
10
Using the health assessment questionnaire to estimate preference-based single indices in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.使用健康评估问卷评估类风湿关节炎患者基于偏好的单一指标。
Arthritis Rheum. 2007 Aug 15;57(6):963-71. doi: 10.1002/art.22885.

引用本文的文献

1
Mapping function from FACT-B to EQ-5D-5 L using multiple modelling approaches: data from breast cancer patients in China.使用多种建模方法将 FACT-B 映射到 EQ-5D-5L:来自中国乳腺癌患者的数据。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2019 Oct 15;17(1):153. doi: 10.1186/s12955-019-1224-8.
2
Should additional domains be added to the EQ-5D health-related quality of life instrument for community-based studies? An analytical descriptive study.对于基于社区的研究,是否应在EQ-5D健康相关生活质量量表中增加其他领域?一项分析性描述性研究。
Popul Health Metr. 2015 Jun 2;13:13. doi: 10.1186/s12963-015-0046-0. eCollection 2015.
3
Use of health-related quality of life measures to predict health utility in postmenopausal osteoporotic women: results from the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation study.使用健康相关生活质量指标预测绝经后骨质疏松妇女的健康效用:来自雷洛昔芬评估研究的多个结局。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013 Nov 5;11:189. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-11-189.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparison of 5 health-related quality-of-life indexes using item response theory analysis.运用项目反应理论分析比较 5 项健康相关生活质量指标。
Med Decis Making. 2010 Jan-Feb;30(1):5-15. doi: 10.1177/0272989X09347016. Epub 2009 Oct 20.
2
Predicting EuroQol (EQ-5D) scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items and domain item banks in a United States sample.在美国样本中,根据患者报告结局测量信息系统(PROMIS)的总体项目和领域项目库预测欧洲五维度健康量表(EQ-5D)得分。
Qual Life Res. 2009 Aug;18(6):783-91. doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9489-8. Epub 2009 May 27.
3
Sequential change in quality of life for patients with incident clinical fractures: a prospective study.连续变化的生活质量的患者与临床骨折的发生率:一项前瞻性研究。
Osteoporos Int. 2009 May;20(5):695-702. doi: 10.1007/s00198-008-0761-5. Epub 2008 Oct 3.
4
Long-term cost and effect on quality of life of osteoporosis-related fractures in Sweden.瑞典骨质疏松性骨折的长期成本及对生活质量的影响。
Acta Orthop. 2008 Apr;79(2):269-80. doi: 10.1080/17453670710015094.
5
Comparing the incomparable? A systematic review of competing techniques for converting descriptive measures of health status into QALY-weights.比较无可比性的事物?将健康状况描述性指标转化为质量调整生命年权重的竞争性技术的系统评价
Med Decis Making. 2008 Jan-Feb;28(1):66-89. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07309642.
6
Characterization of patients in the European Forsteo Observational Study (EFOS): postmenopausal women entering teriparatide treatment in a community setting.欧洲福斯素观察性研究(EFOS)中患者的特征:在社区环境中开始接受特立帕肽治疗的绝经后妇女。
Curr Med Res Opin. 2008 Feb;24(2):377-84. doi: 10.1185/030079908x261087.
7
Impact of prevalent and incident vertebral fractures on utility: results from a patient-based and a population-based sample.现患和新发椎体骨折对效用的影响:基于患者样本和基于人群样本的结果
Qual Life Res. 2008 Feb;17(1):159-67. doi: 10.1007/s11136-007-9287-0. Epub 2007 Nov 27.
8
Fracture incidence and changes in quality of life in women with an inadequate clinical outcome from osteoporosis therapy: the Observational Study of Severe Osteoporosis (OSSO).骨质疏松症治疗临床结局不佳的女性骨折发生率及生活质量变化:严重骨质疏松症观察研究(OSSO)
Osteoporos Int. 2008 Apr;19(4):493-501. doi: 10.1007/s00198-007-0488-8. Epub 2007 Oct 30.
9
Using the health assessment questionnaire to estimate preference-based single indices in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.使用健康评估问卷评估类风湿关节炎患者基于偏好的单一指标。
Arthritis Rheum. 2007 Aug 15;57(6):963-71. doi: 10.1002/art.22885.
10
Assessing differences in utility scores: a comparison of four widely used preference-based instruments.评估效用分数的差异:四种广泛使用的基于偏好的工具的比较。
Value Health. 2007 Jul-Aug;10(4):256-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00174.x.

从骨质疏松评估问卷预测 EQ-5D-US 和 SF-6D 社会健康状态值。

Predicting EQ-5D-US and SF-6D societal health state values from the Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire.

机构信息

The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Dartmouth College, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA.

出版信息

Osteoporos Int. 2012 Feb;23(2):723-32. doi: 10.1007/s00198-011-1619-9. Epub 2011 Apr 12.

DOI:10.1007/s00198-011-1619-9
PMID:21484360
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4017660/
Abstract

SUMMARY

Linear regression was applied to data from 275 persons with osteoporosis-related fracture to estimate EQ-5D-US and SF-6D health state values from the Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire. The models explained 56% and 58% of the variance in scores, respectively, and root mean square error values (0.096 and 0.085) indicated adequate prediction for use when actual values are unavailable.

INTRODUCTION

This study was conducted to provide models that predict EQ-5D-US and SF-6D societal health state values from the Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire (OPAQ).

METHODS

OPAQ, EQ-5D, and SF-6D data from individuals at two centers with prior osteoporosis-related fracture were used. Fractures were classified by type as hip/hip-like, spine/spine-like, or wrist/wrist-like. Spearman rank correlations between preference-based system (EQ-5D and SF-6D) dimensions and OPAQ subscales were estimated. Linear regression was used to estimate preference-based system health state values based on OPAQ subscales. We assessed models including age, sex, and fracture type and chose the model with the best performance based on the root mean square error (RMSE) estimate.

RESULTS

Among the 275 participants (198 women), with mean age of 68 years (range 50-94), the distribution of fracture types included 10% hip/5% hip-like, 18% spine/11% spine-like, and 24% wrist/18% wrist-like. The final regression model for EQ-5D-US included three OPAQ attributes (physical function, emotional status, and symptoms), predicted 56% of the variance in EQ-5D-US scores, and had a RMSE of 0.096. The final model for SF-6D, which included all four OPAQ dimensions, predicted 58% of the variance in SF-6D scores and had a RMSE of 0.085.

CONCLUSIONS

Two models were developed to estimate EQ-5D-US and SF-6D health state values from OPAQ and demonstrated adequate prediction for use when actual values are not available.

摘要

摘要

线性回归分析应用于 275 例骨质疏松性骨折患者的数据,以从骨质疏松评估问卷中估算 EQ-5D-US 和 SF-6D 健康状况值。模型分别解释了分数的 56%和 58%,均方根误差值(0.096 和 0.085)表明在无法获得实际值时具有足够的预测能力。

介绍

本研究旨在提供从骨质疏松评估问卷(OPAQ)中预测 EQ-5D-US 和 SF-6D 社会健康状况值的模型。

方法

使用来自两个中心有既往骨质疏松性骨折的个体的 OPAQ、EQ-5D 和 SF-6D 数据。骨折按类型分为髋/髋样、脊柱/脊柱样或腕/腕样。估计偏好系统(EQ-5D 和 SF-6D)维度与 OPAQ 分量表之间的 Spearman 秩相关。使用线性回归根据 OPAQ 分量表估算偏好系统健康状况值。我们评估了包含年龄、性别和骨折类型的模型,并根据均方根误差(RMSE)估计选择了性能最佳的模型。

结果

在 275 名参与者(198 名女性)中,平均年龄为 68 岁(范围 50-94 岁),骨折类型分布包括 10%髋/5%髋样、18%脊柱/11%脊柱样和 24%腕/18%腕样。EQ-5D-US 的最终回归模型包括 OPAQ 的三个属性(身体功能、情绪状态和症状),预测了 EQ-5D-US 评分的 56%方差,RMSE 为 0.096。SF-6D 的最终模型包括 OPAQ 的所有四个维度,预测了 SF-6D 评分的 58%方差,RMSE 为 0.085。

结论

开发了两个模型来从 OPAQ 估算 EQ-5D-US 和 SF-6D 健康状况值,并且在无法获得实际值时具有足够的预测能力。