Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Pulmonary Medicine 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease | Research article

Validity of EQ-5D utility index and minimal clinically important difference estimation among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Authors: Eunmi Bae, Sang-Eun Choi, Haeyoung Lee, Gyeongseon Shin, Daewon Kang

Published in: BMC Pulmonary Medicine | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The discriminatory ability of multi-attribute utility (MAU) measures compared to condition-specific measures (CSM) in assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an unsettled issue. This study investigated the quality of life of patients with COPD with three different HRQoL instruments and examined whether they could differentiate between adjacent severity groups in a statistically and clinically meaningful manner. In the process, the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) of the EQ-5D utility index were estimated.

Methods

Cross-sectional survey data were collected from patients with mild to very severe COPD in South Korea. In addition to demographic and clinical information, the following HRQoL questionnaires were used: The three-level five-dimensional Euro-Quality of Life tool (EQ-5D-3L), the EQ-Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS), and the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test (CAT). Patients’ health-related quality of life was analyzed with reference to severity groups based on the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) classification. To investigate the discriminatory ability of the HRQoL instruments between COPD severity groups, tests examining variance, covariance, and standardized mean difference were performed. After estimating the MCID of the EQ-5D utility index using the anchor-based method, we investigated whether the differences in the EQ-5D utility scores between groups exceeded the clinically meaningful minimum level.

Results

A total of 298 patients completed this study. All the quality of life scores showed statistically significant differences between the GOLD severity groups. The pooled MCID estimate for the EQ-5D utility index was 0.028 (range: 0.017–0.033). Even after adjusting for other factors affecting quality of life, the EQ-5D utility index differentiated the GOLD groups well.

Conclusions

We conclude that the EQ-5D utility index is a valid instrument for measuring the quality of life of patients with COPD, and the pooled MCID estimate for the EQ-5D utility index was 0.028.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Vestbo J, Hurd SS, Agustí AG, Jones PW, Vogelmeier C, Anzueto A, et al. Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: GOLD executive summary. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;187:347–65.CrossRefPubMed Vestbo J, Hurd SS, Agustí AG, Jones PW, Vogelmeier C, Anzueto A, et al. Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: GOLD executive summary. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;187:347–65.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Nici L, Donner C, Wouters E, Zuwallack R, Ambrosino N, Bourbeau J, et al. American thoracic society/European respiratory society statement on pulmonary rehabilitation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;173:1390–413.CrossRefPubMed Nici L, Donner C, Wouters E, Zuwallack R, Ambrosino N, Bourbeau J, et al. American thoracic society/European respiratory society statement on pulmonary rehabilitation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;173:1390–413.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Ståhl E, Lindberg A, Jansson S-A, Rönmark E, Svensson K, Andersson F, et al. Health-related quality of life is related to COPD disease severity. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005;3:56.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ståhl E, Lindberg A, Jansson S-A, Rönmark E, Svensson K, Andersson F, et al. Health-related quality of life is related to COPD disease severity. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005;3:56.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Guyatt GH. Measurement of health-related quality of life in heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22(4 Supplement 1):A185–91.CrossRef Guyatt GH. Measurement of health-related quality of life in heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22(4 Supplement 1):A185–91.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Moayeri F, Arthur HY-S, Clarke P, Dunt D. Do Model-Based Studies in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Measure Correct Values of Utility? A Meta-Analysis. Value Health. 2016;19:363–73.CrossRefPubMed Moayeri F, Arthur HY-S, Clarke P, Dunt D. Do Model-Based Studies in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Measure Correct Values of Utility? A Meta-Analysis. Value Health. 2016;19:363–73.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Zafari Z, Bryan S, Sin DD, Conte T, Khakban R, Sadatsafavi M. A systematic review of health economics simulation models of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Value Health. 2017;20:152–62.CrossRefPubMed Zafari Z, Bryan S, Sin DD, Conte T, Khakban R, Sadatsafavi M. A systematic review of health economics simulation models of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Value Health. 2017;20:152–62.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Pauwels RA, Buist AS, Calverley PM, Jenkins CR, Hurd SS. Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: NHLBI/WHO global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease (GOLD) workshop summary. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001;163:1256–76.CrossRefPubMed Pauwels RA, Buist AS, Calverley PM, Jenkins CR, Hurd SS. Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: NHLBI/WHO global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease (GOLD) workshop summary. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001;163:1256–76.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Burkes RM, Donohue JF. An update on the global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease 2017 guidelines with a focus on classification and Management of Stable COPD. Respir Care. 2018;63:749–58.CrossRefPubMed Burkes RM, Donohue JF. An update on the global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease 2017 guidelines with a focus on classification and Management of Stable COPD. Respir Care. 2018;63:749–58.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Simon Pickard A, Wilke C, Jung E, Patel S, Stavem K, Lee TA. Use of a preference-based measure of health (EQ-5D) in COPD and asthma. Respir Med. 2008;102:519–36.CrossRefPubMed Simon Pickard A, Wilke C, Jung E, Patel S, Stavem K, Lee TA. Use of a preference-based measure of health (EQ-5D) in COPD and asthma. Respir Med. 2008;102:519–36.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Einarson TR, Bereza BG, Nielsen TA, Hemels MEH. Utilities for asthma and COPD according to category of severity: a comprehensive literature review. J Med Econ. 2015;18:550–63.CrossRefPubMed Einarson TR, Bereza BG, Nielsen TA, Hemels MEH. Utilities for asthma and COPD according to category of severity: a comprehensive literature review. J Med Econ. 2015;18:550–63.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Rutten-van Mölken MPMH, Oostenbrink JB, Tashkin DP, Burkhart D, Monz BU. Does quality of life of COPD patients as measured by the generic EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire differentiate between COPD severity stages? Chest. 2006;130:1117–28.CrossRefPubMed Rutten-van Mölken MPMH, Oostenbrink JB, Tashkin DP, Burkhart D, Monz BU. Does quality of life of COPD patients as measured by the generic EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire differentiate between COPD severity stages? Chest. 2006;130:1117–28.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Szende A, Leidy NK, Ståhl E, Svensson K. Estimating health utilities in patients with asthma and COPD: evidence on the performance of EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res. 2009;18:267–72.CrossRefPubMed Szende A, Leidy NK, Ståhl E, Svensson K. Estimating health utilities in patients with asthma and COPD: evidence on the performance of EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res. 2009;18:267–72.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Petrillo J, van Nooten F, Jones P, Rutten-van MM. Utility estimation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a preference for change? PharmacoEconomics. 2011;29:917–32.CrossRefPubMed Petrillo J, van Nooten F, Jones P, Rutten-van MM. Utility estimation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a preference for change? PharmacoEconomics. 2011;29:917–32.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Brazier J, Tsuchiya A. Preference-based condition-specific measures of health: what happens to cross programme comparability? Health Econ. 2010;19:125–9.CrossRefPubMed Brazier J, Tsuchiya A. Preference-based condition-specific measures of health: what happens to cross programme comparability? Health Econ. 2010;19:125–9.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Johnston BC, Ebrahim S, Carrasco-Labra A, Furukawa TA, Patrick DL, Crawford MW, et al. Minimally important difference estimates and methods: a protocol. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e007953.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Johnston BC, Ebrahim S, Carrasco-Labra A, Furukawa TA, Patrick DL, Crawford MW, et al. Minimally important difference estimates and methods: a protocol. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e007953.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Rodriguez-Roisin R. Toward a consensus definition for COPD exacerbations. Chest. 2000;117:398S–401S.CrossRefPubMed Rodriguez-Roisin R. Toward a consensus definition for COPD exacerbations. Chest. 2000;117:398S–401S.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Burge S, Wedzicha JA. COPD exacerbations: definitions and classifications. Eur Respir J. 2003;21(Supplement 41):46S–53s.CrossRef Burge S, Wedzicha JA. COPD exacerbations: definitions and classifications. Eur Respir J. 2003;21(Supplement 41):46S–53s.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-SD: a measure of health status from the EuroQol group. Ann Med. 2001;33:337–43.CrossRefPubMed Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-SD: a measure of health status from the EuroQol group. Ann Med. 2001;33:337–43.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Lee Y-K, Nam H-S, Chuang L-H, Kim K-Y, Yang H-K, Kwon I-S, et al. South Korean time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states: modeling with observed values for 101 health states. Value Health. 2009;12:1187–93..CrossRefPubMed Lee Y-K, Nam H-S, Chuang L-H, Kim K-Y, Yang H-K, Kwon I-S, et al. South Korean time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states: modeling with observed values for 101 health states. Value Health. 2009;12:1187–93..CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Jones PW, Harding G, Berry P, Wiklund I, Chen W-H, Kline LN. Development and first validation of the COPD assessment test. Eur Respir J. 2009;34:648–54..CrossRefPubMed Jones PW, Harding G, Berry P, Wiklund I, Chen W-H, Kline LN. Development and first validation of the COPD assessment test. Eur Respir J. 2009;34:648–54..CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Lee S, Lee JS, Song JW, Choi C-M, Shim TS, Kim TB, et al. Validation of the Korean version of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test (CAT) and Dyspnea-12 questionnaire. Tuberc Respir Dis. 2010;69:171.CrossRef Lee S, Lee JS, Song JW, Choi C-M, Shim TS, Kim TB, et al. Validation of the Korean version of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test (CAT) and Dyspnea-12 questionnaire. Tuberc Respir Dis. 2010;69:171.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Hwang YI, Jung K-S, Lim S-Y, Lee Y-S, Kwon N-H. A validation study for the Korean version of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test (CAT). Tuberc Respir Dis. 2013;74:256.CrossRef Hwang YI, Jung K-S, Lim S-Y, Lee Y-S, Kwon N-H. A validation study for the Korean version of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test (CAT). Tuberc Respir Dis. 2013;74:256.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Sawilowsky SS. New effect size rules of thumb. J Mod Appl Stat Methods. 2009;8:597–9.CrossRef Sawilowsky SS. New effect size rules of thumb. J Mod Appl Stat Methods. 2009;8:597–9.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Copay AG, Subach BR, Glassman SD, Polly DW, Schuler TC. Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J. 2007;7:541–6.CrossRefPubMed Copay AG, Subach BR, Glassman SD, Polly DW, Schuler TC. Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J. 2007;7:541–6.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Samsa G, Edelman D, Rothman ML, Williams GR, Lipscomb J, Matchar D. Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: a general approach with illustration to the health utilities index mark II. PharmacoEconomics. 1999;15:141–55.CrossRefPubMed Samsa G, Edelman D, Rothman ML, Williams GR, Lipscomb J, Matchar D. Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: a general approach with illustration to the health utilities index mark II. PharmacoEconomics. 1999;15:141–55.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, Sloan J. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:102–9.CrossRefPubMed Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, Sloan J. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:102–9.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Coretti S, Ruggeri M, McNamee P. The minimum clinically important difference for EQ-5D index: a critical review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014;14:221–33.CrossRefPubMed Coretti S, Ruggeri M, McNamee P. The minimum clinically important difference for EQ-5D index: a critical review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014;14:221–33.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Angst J. The minimal clinically important difference raised the significance of outcome effects above the statistical level, with methodological implications for future studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;82:128–36.CrossRefPubMed Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Angst J. The minimal clinically important difference raised the significance of outcome effects above the statistical level, with methodological implications for future studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;82:128–36.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care. 2003;41:582–92. Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care. 2003;41:582–92.
32.
go back to reference Weir JP. Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19:231–40.PubMed Weir JP. Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19:231–40.PubMed
33.
go back to reference Lee SI. Validity and reliability evaluation for EQ-5D in Korea. Cheongju: Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2011. p. 40–59. Lee SI. Validity and reliability evaluation for EQ-5D in Korea. Cheongju: Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2011. p. 40–59.
34.
go back to reference Cazzola M, MacNee W, Martinez FJ, Rabe KF, Franciosi LG, Barnes PJ, et al. Outcomes for COPD pharmacological trials: from lung function to biomarkers. Eur Respir J. 2008;31:416–69.CrossRefPubMed Cazzola M, MacNee W, Martinez FJ, Rabe KF, Franciosi LG, Barnes PJ, et al. Outcomes for COPD pharmacological trials: from lung function to biomarkers. Eur Respir J. 2008;31:416–69.CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Jones PW, Beeh KM, Chapman KR, Decramer M, Mahler DA, Wedzicha JA. Minimal clinically important differences in pharmacological trials. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2014;189:250–5.CrossRefPubMed Jones PW, Beeh KM, Chapman KR, Decramer M, Mahler DA, Wedzicha JA. Minimal clinically important differences in pharmacological trials. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2014;189:250–5.CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Zanini A, Aiello M, Adamo D, Casale S, Cherubino F, Della Patrona S, et al. Estimation of minimal clinically important difference in EQ-5D visual analog scale score after pulmonary rehabilitation in subjects with COPD. Respir Care. 2015;60:88–95.CrossRefPubMed Zanini A, Aiello M, Adamo D, Casale S, Cherubino F, Della Patrona S, et al. Estimation of minimal clinically important difference in EQ-5D visual analog scale score after pulmonary rehabilitation in subjects with COPD. Respir Care. 2015;60:88–95.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Tsiligianni IG, van der Molen T, Moraitaki D, Lopez I, Kocks JW, Karagiannis K, et al. Assessing health status in COPD. A head-to-head comparison between the COPD assessment test (CAT) and the clinical COPD questionnaire (CCQ). BMC Pulmon Med. 2012;12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2466-12-20. Tsiligianni IG, van der Molen T, Moraitaki D, Lopez I, Kocks JW, Karagiannis K, et al. Assessing health status in COPD. A head-to-head comparison between the COPD assessment test (CAT) and the clinical COPD questionnaire (CCQ). BMC Pulmon Med. 2012;12. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​1471-2466-12-20.
38.
go back to reference Kon SSC, Canavan JL, Jones SE, Nolan CM, Clark AL, Dickson MJ, et al. Minimum clinically important difference for the COPD assessment test: a prospective analysis. Lancet Respir Med. 2014;2:195–203.CrossRefPubMed Kon SSC, Canavan JL, Jones SE, Nolan CM, Clark AL, Dickson MJ, et al. Minimum clinically important difference for the COPD assessment test: a prospective analysis. Lancet Respir Med. 2014;2:195–203.CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Smid DE, Franssen FME, Houben-Wilke S, Vanfleteren LEGW, Janssen DJA, Wouters EFM, et al. Responsiveness and MCID estimates for CAT, CCQ, and HADS in patients with COPD undergoing pulmonary rehabilitation: a prospective analysis. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017;18:53–8.CrossRefPubMed Smid DE, Franssen FME, Houben-Wilke S, Vanfleteren LEGW, Janssen DJA, Wouters EFM, et al. Responsiveness and MCID estimates for CAT, CCQ, and HADS in patients with COPD undergoing pulmonary rehabilitation: a prospective analysis. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017;18:53–8.CrossRefPubMed
40.
41.
go back to reference Alma HJ, de Jong C, Jelusic D, Wittmann M, Schuler M, Kollen BJ, et al. Assessing health status over time: impact of recall period and anchor question on the minimal clinically important difference of copd health status tools. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0950-7. Alma HJ, de Jong C, Jelusic D, Wittmann M, Schuler M, Kollen BJ, et al. Assessing health status over time: impact of recall period and anchor question on the minimal clinically important difference of copd health status tools. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12955-018-0950-7.
42.
go back to reference Brazier J, Roberts J, Tsuchiya A, Busschbach J. A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ. 2004;13:873–84.CrossRefPubMed Brazier J, Roberts J, Tsuchiya A, Busschbach J. A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ. 2004;13:873–84.CrossRefPubMed
43.
go back to reference Bharmal M, Thomas J. Comparing the EQ-5D and the SF-6D descriptive systems to assess their ceiling effects in the US general population. Value Health. 2006;9:262–71.CrossRefPubMed Bharmal M, Thomas J. Comparing the EQ-5D and the SF-6D descriptive systems to assess their ceiling effects in the US general population. Value Health. 2006;9:262–71.CrossRefPubMed
44.
go back to reference Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Mf J, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20:1727–36.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Mf J, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20:1727–36.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
45.
go back to reference Jones P, Price D, van der Molen T. Role of clinical questionnaires in optimizing everyday care of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2011;6:289–96. Jones P, Price D, van der Molen T. Role of clinical questionnaires in optimizing everyday care of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2011;6:289–96.
46.
go back to reference Goossens LMA, Leimer I, Metzdorf N, Becker K, MPMH R-v M. Does the 2013 GOLD classification improve the ability to predict lung function decline, exacerbations and mortality: a post-hoc analysis of the 4-year UPLIFT trial. BMC Pulmon Med. 2014:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2466-14-163. Goossens LMA, Leimer I, Metzdorf N, Becker K, MPMH R-v M. Does the 2013 GOLD classification improve the ability to predict lung function decline, exacerbations and mortality: a post-hoc analysis of the 4-year UPLIFT trial. BMC Pulmon Med. 2014:14. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​1471-2466-14-163.
47.
go back to reference Moayeri F, Arthur HY-S, Clarke P, Hua X, Dunt D. Health state utility value in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); the challenge of heterogeneity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. COPD. 2016;13:380–98.CrossRefPubMed Moayeri F, Arthur HY-S, Clarke P, Hua X, Dunt D. Health state utility value in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); the challenge of heterogeneity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. COPD. 2016;13:380–98.CrossRefPubMed
48.
go back to reference Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res. 2005;14:1523–32.CrossRefPubMed Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res. 2005;14:1523–32.CrossRefPubMed
49.
go back to reference Leidy NK, Wyrwich KW. Bridging the gap: using triangulation methodology to estimate minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs). COPD. 2005;2:157–65.CrossRefPubMed Leidy NK, Wyrwich KW. Bridging the gap: using triangulation methodology to estimate minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs). COPD. 2005;2:157–65.CrossRefPubMed
50.
go back to reference Marra CA, Woolcott JC, Kopec JA, Shojania K, Offer R, Brazier JE, et al. A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Soc Sci Med. 2005;60:1571–82.CrossRefPubMed Marra CA, Woolcott JC, Kopec JA, Shojania K, Offer R, Brazier JE, et al. A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Soc Sci Med. 2005;60:1571–82.CrossRefPubMed
51.
go back to reference Brooks R, Rabin R, De Charro F. The measurement and valuation of health status using EQ-5D: a European perspective: evidence from the EuroQol BIOMED research Programme. Netherlands: Springer Science & Business Media; 2013. Brooks R, Rabin R, De Charro F. The measurement and valuation of health status using EQ-5D: a European perspective: evidence from the EuroQol BIOMED research Programme. Netherlands: Springer Science & Business Media; 2013.
Metadata
Title
Validity of EQ-5D utility index and minimal clinically important difference estimation among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Authors
Eunmi Bae
Sang-Eun Choi
Haeyoung Lee
Gyeongseon Shin
Daewon Kang
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Pulmonary Medicine / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2466
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-020-1116-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Pulmonary Medicine 1/2020 Go to the issue
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discuss last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.