Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKlapproth, Christoph Paul
dc.contributor.authorFischer, Felix
dc.contributor.authorRose, Matthias S. F.
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-15T14:48:17Z
dc.date.available2024-02-15T14:48:17Z
dc.date.issued2023-09-27
dc.identifier.citationKlapproth CP, Fischer F, Rose M. Scale agreement, ceiling and floor effects, construct validity, and relative efficiency of the PROPr and EQ-5D-3L in low back pain patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2023 Sep 27;21(1):107. doi: 10.1186/s12955-023-02188-w. PMID: 37759272; PMCID: PMC10523622.en_US
dc.identifier.eissn1477-7525
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12955-023-02188-wen_US
dc.identifier.pmid37759272
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/53067
dc.description.abstractBackground: The PROMIS Preference score (PROPr) is a new health state utility (HSU) score that aims to comprehensively incorporate the biopsychosocial model of health and apply favorable psychometric properties from the descriptive PROMIS system to HSU measurements. However, minimal evidence concerning comparisons to the EQ-5D-3L and the PROPr's capability to differentiate clinical severity are available. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the PROPr to the EQ-5D-3L in terms of scale agreement, ceiling/floor effects, distribution, construct validity, discriminatory power, and relative efficiency (RE) in terms of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for patients with low back pain (LBP). Methods: We used intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots to compare the PROPr and EQ-5D-3L with regared to scale agreement in a cross-sectional routine sample of LBP patients. For distribution, we used the Pearson's coefficient for skewness and for ceiling/floor effects, a 15%-top/bottom threshold. For convergent validity, we used Pearson's correlation coefficients. For known-groups validity, we applied a linear regression with interaction terms (predictors sex, age, and ODI level) and an analysis of variance (ANOVA). For discriminatory power, we calculated the effect size (ES) using Cohen's d and the ratio of the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curves (AUROC-ratio = AUROCPROPr/AUROCEQ-5D-3L). RE was measured using the ratio of F-values (RE = FPROPr/FEQ-5D-3L). Results: Of 218 LBP patients, 50.0% were female and the mean age was 61.8 years. The mean PROPr (0.20, 95%CI: 0.18; 0.22) and EQ-5D-3L scores (0.55, 95%CI: 0.51; 0.58) showed low agreement (d = 0.35, p < 0.001; ICC 0.27, 95%CI: -0.09; 0.59). The PROPr's distribution was positively skewed, whereas the EQ-5D-3L's was negative. Neither tool showed ceiling/floor effects, but all EQ-5D-3L dimensions did. Pearson correlation was r = 0.66 (95%CI: 0.58; 0.73). Differences were invariant to sex and age but not to ODI severity: ESEQ-5D-3L > ESPROPr and RE < 1 in higher ODI severity; ESEQ-5D-3L < ESPROPr and RE > 1 in lower ODI severity. AUROC-ratios did not show significant differences in terms of ODI severity. Conclusions: All PROPr and EQ-5D-3L biopsychosocial dimensions of health showed impairment in LPB patients. The capability of EQ-5D-3L and PROPr to differentiate ODI levels depends on ODI severity. Joint application of both tools may provide additional information.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofHealth and Quality of Life Outcomesen_US
dc.relation.urlhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-023-02188-wen_US
dc.rights© The Author(s) 2023. Open Access: This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecom- mons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.en_US
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subjectEQ-5D-3Len_US
dc.subjectHealth State Utilityen_US
dc.subjectLow back painen_US
dc.subjectODIen_US
dc.subjectPROPren_US
dc.subjectPreference-based measuresen_US
dc.titleScale agreement, ceiling and floor effects, construct validity, and relative efficiency of the PROPr and EQ-5D-3L in low back pain patientsen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.source.journaltitleHealth and quality of life outcomes
dc.source.volume21
dc.source.issue1
dc.source.beginpage107
dc.source.endpage
dc.source.countryEngland
dc.identifier.journalHealth and quality of life outcomes
refterms.dateFOA2024-02-15T14:48:18Z
dc.contributor.departmentPopulation and Quantitative Health Sciencesen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
s12955-023-02188-w.pdf
Size:
1.060Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© The Author(s) 2023. Open Access: This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which
permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the
original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or
other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line
to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory
regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this
licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecom-
mons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © The Author(s) 2023. Open Access: This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecom- mons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.