• 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

欧洲五维度健康量表(EuroQol EQ-5D-5L)与美国疾病控制与预防中心(CDC)健康天数指标在评估人群健康方面的比较表现

Comparative performance of the EuroQol EQ-5D-5L and the CDC healthy days measures in assessing population health.

作者信息

Derkach Maryna, Al Sayah Fatima, Ohinmaa Arto, Svenson Lawrence W, Johnson Jeffrey A

机构信息

Alberta PROMs and EQ-5D Research and Support Unit (APERSU), School of Public Health, University of Alberta, 2-040 Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Research Innovation, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E1, Canada.

Alberta Health, Station Main, PO Box 1360, Edmonton, AB, T5J 2N3, Canada.

出版信息

J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2022 Jun 13;6(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s41687-022-00474-7.

DOI:10.1186/s41687-022-00474-7
PMID:35696002
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9192869/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To examine the comparative performance of EuroQol EQ-5D-5L and Center for Disease Control Healthy Days measures in assessing population health.

METHODS

Using data from 2014 Alberta Community Health Survey, a cross-sectional population-based survey (N = 7559), conducted in Alberta, Canada, we examined construct validity of the measures as indicators of population health. Differences in EQ-5D-5L index score, visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS), and CDC unhealthy days index across socio-demographic subgroups were tested by Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests using known-groups approach.

RESULTS

EQ-5D-5L and CDC Healthy Days provided comparable assessments of population health in this sample. Both measures discriminated between subgroups defined by self-perceived health status, level of education, and material deprivation. The discriminative ability of CDC Healthy Days was limited in capturing variability in health among age groups compared to the EQ-5D-5L. Among participants who reported 0 unhealthy days, the proportion of those with level 3 problems in pain/discomfort varied from 1.1% for participants aged 18-24 to 19.2% for those over 75 years.

CONCLUSIONS

EQ-5D-5L demonstrated better construct validity than CDC Healthy Days in assessing health in a population-based sample of adults.

摘要

目的

考察欧洲五维度健康量表(EuroQol EQ - 5D - 5L)和美国疾病控制与预防中心健康日指标在评估人群健康方面的比较表现。

方法

利用2014年艾伯塔社区健康调查的数据,这是一项在加拿大艾伯塔省开展的基于人群的横断面调查(N = 7559),我们检验了这些指标作为人群健康指标的结构效度。采用已知组方法,通过曼 - 惠特尼检验和克鲁斯卡尔 - 沃利斯检验,对社会人口学亚组间的EQ - 5D - 5L指数得分、视觉模拟量表(EQ - VAS)以及美国疾病控制与预防中心不健康日指数的差异进行了检验。

结果

在本样本中,EQ - 5D - 5L和美国疾病控制与预防中心健康日指标对人群健康的评估结果相当。这两种指标在由自我感知健康状况、教育水平和物质匮乏程度所定义的亚组之间都具有区分能力。与EQ - 5D - 5L相比,美国疾病控制与预防中心健康日指标在捕捉不同年龄组健康差异方面的区分能力有限。在报告0个不健康日的参与者中,疼痛/不适程度为3级问题的参与者比例在18 - 24岁的参与者中为1.1%,在75岁以上的参与者中为19.2%。

结论

在基于人群的成人样本中评估健康状况时,EQ - 5D - 5L的结构效度优于美国疾病控制与预防中心健康日指标。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eaf6/9192869/8903113c5b16/41687_2022_474_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eaf6/9192869/f6ce1229b87d/41687_2022_474_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eaf6/9192869/867b89e4512c/41687_2022_474_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eaf6/9192869/f9314e9e24d3/41687_2022_474_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eaf6/9192869/8903113c5b16/41687_2022_474_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eaf6/9192869/f6ce1229b87d/41687_2022_474_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eaf6/9192869/867b89e4512c/41687_2022_474_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eaf6/9192869/f9314e9e24d3/41687_2022_474_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eaf6/9192869/8903113c5b16/41687_2022_474_Fig4_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparative performance of the EuroQol EQ-5D-5L and the CDC healthy days measures in assessing population health.欧洲五维度健康量表(EuroQol EQ-5D-5L)与美国疾病控制与预防中心(CDC)健康天数指标在评估人群健康方面的比较表现
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2022 Jun 13;6(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s41687-022-00474-7.
2
Health-related quality of life measured using the EQ-5D-5L: South Australian population norms.使用EQ-5D-5L量表测量的健康相关生活质量:南澳大利亚州人群常模。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016 Sep 20;14(1):133. doi: 10.1186/s12955-016-0537-0.
3
EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) Validity in Assessing the Quality of Life in Adults With Asthma: Cross-Sectional Study.欧洲五维度健康量表(EQ-5D-5L)在评估成人哮喘患者生活质量中的效度:横断面研究
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Jan 23;21(1):e10178. doi: 10.2196/10178.
4
The use of EQ-5D-5L as a patient-reported outcome measure in evaluating community rehabilitation services in Alberta, Canada.加拿大艾伯塔省使用 EQ-5D-5L 作为评价社区康复服务的患者报告结局测量工具。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2023 Nov 17;21(1):125. doi: 10.1186/s12955-023-02207-w.
5
The EQ-5D-5L Is Superior to the -3L Version in Measuring Health-related Quality of Life in Patients Awaiting THA or TKA.在测量等待全髋关节置换术或全膝关节置换术的患者的健康相关生活质量方面,EQ-5D-5L 优于 -3L 版本。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2019 Jul;477(7):1632-1644. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000662.
6
EQ-5D-Y-5L as a patient-reported outcome measure in psychiatric inpatient care for children and adolescents - a cross-sectional study.EQ-5D-Y-5L 作为儿童和青少年精神科住院患者的患者报告结局测量工具 - 一项横断面研究。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020 Jun 3;18(1):164. doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01366-4.
7
Comparison of the preference-based EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD).终末期肾病(ESRD)患者中基于偏好的EQ-5D-5L与SF-6D的比较。
Eur J Health Econ. 2015 Dec;16(9):1019-26. doi: 10.1007/s10198-014-0664-7. Epub 2014 Dec 18.
8
Assessing the health of the general population in England: how do the three- and five-level versions of EQ-5D compare?评估英格兰普通人群的健康状况:EQ-5D的三级版本和五级版本对比情况如何?
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015 Oct 21;13:171. doi: 10.1186/s12955-015-0356-8.
9
Self-reported health-related quality of life of the general population in Alberta, Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic.加拿大艾伯塔省普通人群在新冠疫情期间自我报告的与健康相关的生活质量
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2022 Oct 12;6(1):109. doi: 10.1186/s41687-022-00518-y.
10
Head-to-head comparison between the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-5D-3L in general population health surveys.在一般人群健康调查中,EQ-5D-5L与EQ-5D-3L的直接比较。
Popul Health Metr. 2018 Aug 16;16(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s12963-018-0170-8.

引用本文的文献

1
Exploring the Validity of Measures of Health-Related Quality of Life in Older Adults at Increased Risk of Falls and/or Fractures in Exercise Clinical Trials.在运动临床试验中,探究针对跌倒和/或骨折风险增加的老年人健康相关生活质量测量指标的有效性。
J Appl Gerontol. 2025 Feb 26;44(10):7334648251316633. doi: 10.1177/07334648251316633.
2
Assessment of Quality of Life in Lithuanian Patients with Multimorbidity Using the EQ-5D-5L Questionnaire.使用EQ-5D-5L问卷评估立陶宛多重疾病患者的生活质量
Medicina (Kaunas). 2025 Feb 8;61(2):292. doi: 10.3390/medicina61020292.

本文引用的文献

1
Validity of the EQ-5D-5L and reference norms for the Spanish population.EQ-5D-5L 及其西班牙人群参考值的有效性。
Qual Life Res. 2018 Sep;27(9):2337-2348. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-1877-5. Epub 2018 May 16.
2
Comparative performance of the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D index scores in adults with type 2 diabetes.2型糖尿病成人患者中EQ-5D-5L与SF-6D指数评分的比较表现
Qual Life Res. 2017 Aug;26(8):2057-2066. doi: 10.1007/s11136-017-1559-8. Epub 2017 Mar 31.
3
Health Related Quality of Life in a Dutch Rehabilitation Population: Reference Values and the Effect of Physical Activity.
荷兰康复人群的健康相关生活质量:参考值及体育活动的影响
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 6;12(1):e0169169. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169169. eCollection 2017.
4
Comparing the performance of the EQ-5D-3L and the EQ-5D-5L in young Portuguese adults.比较葡萄牙年轻成年人中EQ-5D-3L和EQ-5D-5L的性能。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016 Jun 8;14:89. doi: 10.1186/s12955-016-0491-x.
5
Leveraging Health-Related Quality of Life in Population Health Management: The Case for Healthy Days.在人群健康管理中利用与健康相关的生活质量:健康日的案例
Popul Health Manag. 2017 Feb;20(1):13-22. doi: 10.1089/pop.2015.0162. Epub 2016 Mar 31.
6
The EQ-5D-5L health status questionnaire in COPD: validity, responsiveness and minimum important difference.慢性阻塞性肺疾病中的EQ-5D-5L健康状况问卷:效度、反应度和最小重要差异
Thorax. 2016 Jun;71(6):493-500. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-207782. Epub 2016 Mar 30.
7
Assessing the health of the general population in England: how do the three- and five-level versions of EQ-5D compare?评估英格兰普通人群的健康状况:EQ-5D的三级版本和五级版本对比情况如何?
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015 Oct 21;13:171. doi: 10.1186/s12955-015-0356-8.
8
Comparison of health-related quality-of-life measurement instruments in diabetic patients.糖尿病患者健康相关生活质量测量工具的比较
Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip. 2014 Jul 4;28(4):769-774. doi: 10.1080/13102818.2014.935572. Epub 2014 Sep 23.
9
Data Resource Profile: German Health Update (GEDA)--the health interview survey for adults in Germany.数据资源简介:德国健康更新调查(GEDA)——德国成年人健康访谈调查。
Int J Epidemiol. 2015 Apr;44(2):442-50. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyv067. Epub 2015 May 15.
10
A comparison between the EQ-5D and the SF-6D in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者中EQ-5D与SF-6D的比较。
PLoS One. 2014 Nov 7;9(11):e112389. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0112389. eCollection 2014.