Skip to main content
Log in

Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in the general population of South Korea

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The EQ-5D-5L was developed to compensate for a high ceiling effect and lack of descriptive richness of the EQ-5D-3L. We evaluated psychometric properties of EQ-5D-5L in the general population.

Methods

Six hundred of adults were sampled from the general population in South Korea using a multistage stratified quota sampling method. Participants completed the EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L, and SF-36v2. One hundred participants were resurveyed for reliability evaluation. The ceiling effect, known-groups construct validity, convergent and discriminant validity, and reliability of EQ-5D-5L were evaluated.

Results

A smaller proportion of participants answered ‘no problem’ to all dimensions of EQ-5D-5L (61.2 %) than EQ-5D-3L (65.7 %, p < 0.01), indicating a reduced ceiling effect. Female, elderly, low-educated, and low-income participants reported health problems more frequently, indicating known-groups construct validity. The mobility dimension of EQ-5D-5L was better correlated with the physical component score (|r| = 0.48) than the mental component score (|r| = 0.25) of the SF-36v2, and the anxiety/depression dimension was better correlated with mental component score (|r| = 0.45) than physical component score (|r| = 0.34), indicating convergent and discriminant validity. The intraclass correlation coefficient of EQ-5D-5L index was 0.75.

Conclusions

The EQ-5D-5L has a smaller ceiling effect than the EQ-5D-3L and is a valid and reliable instrument to measure health-related quality of life in the general population.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

EQ-5D-3L:

3-Level version of EQ-5D

EQ-5D-5L:

5-Level version of EQ-5D

HRQoL:

Health-related quality of life

VAS:

Visual analogue scale

ICC:

Intraclass correlation coefficient

SF-36v2:

Version 2.0 of the short-form 36

PF:

Physical functioning

RP:

Role-physical

BP:

Bodily pain

GH:

General health

VT:

Vitality

SF:

Social functioning

RE:

Role-emotional

MH:

Mental health

PCS:

Physical component summary

MCS:

Mental component summary

References

  1. Savoia, E., Fantini, M. P., Pandolfi, P. P., Dallolio, L., & Collina, N. (2006). Assessing the construct validity of the Italian version of the EQ-5D: Preliminary results from a cross-sectional study in North Italy. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 4, 47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kontodimopoulos, N., Pappa, E., Niakas, D., Yfantopoulos, J., Dimitrakaki, C., & Tountas, Y. (2008). Validity of the EuroQoL (EQ-5D) instrument in a Greek general population. Value Health, 11(7), 1162–1169.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Badia, X., Schiaffino, A., Alonso, J., & Herdman, M. (1998). Using the EuroQoI 5-D in the Catalan general population: Feasibility and construct validity. Quality of Life Research, 7(4), 311–322.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Chang, T. J., Tarn, Y. H., Hsieh, C. L., Liou, W. S., Shaw, J. W., & Chiou, X. G. (2007). Taiwanese version of the EQ-5D: Validation in a representative sample of the Taiwanese population. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, 106(12), 1023–1031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Shafie, A. A., Hassali, M. A., & Liau, S. Y. (2011). A cross-sectional validation study of EQ-5D among the Malaysian adult population. Quality of Life Research, 20(4), 593–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. The EuroQol Group. (1990). EuroQol–a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy, 16(3), 199–208.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Janssen, M. F., Birnie, E., Haagsma, J. A., & Bonsel, G. J. (2008). Comparing the standard EQ-5D three-level system with a five-level version. Value Health, 11(2), 275–284.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Johnson, J. A., & Pickard, A. S. (2000). Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 health surveys in a general population survey in Alberta, Canada. Medicinal Care, 38(1), 115–121.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Sun, S., Chen, J., Johannesson, M., Kind, P., Xu, L., Zhang, Y., et al. (2011). Population health status in China: EQ-5D results, by age, sex and socio-economic status, from the National Health Services Survey 2008. Quality of Life Research, 20(3), 309–320.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Burstrom, K., Johannesson, M., & Diderichsen, F. (2001). Health-related quality of life by disease and socio-economic group in the general population in Sweden. Health Policy, 55(1), 51–69.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Johnson, J. A., & Coons, S. J. (1998). Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 in an adult US sample. Quality of Life Research, 7(2), 155–166.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., Bonsel, G., & Badia, X. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research, 20(10), 1727–1736.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kim, S. H., Kim, H. J., Lee, S. I., & Jo, M. W. (2012). Comparing the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in cancer patients in Korea. Quality of Life Research, 21(6), 1065–1073.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Pickard, A. S., De Leon, M. C., Kohlmann, T., Cella, D., & Rosenbloom, S. (2007). Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Medical Care, 45(3), 259–263.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. McHorney, C. A., Ware, J. E., Jr, & Raczek, A. E. (1993). The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Medical Care, 31(3), 247–263.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Lee, Y. K., Nam, H. S., Chuang, L. H., Kim, K. Y., Yang, H. K., Kwon, I. S., et al. (2009). South Korean time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states: Modeling with observed values for 101 health states. Value Health, 12(8), 1187–1193.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lubetkin, E. I., Jia, H., Franks, P., & Gold, M. R. (2005). Relationship among sociodemographic factors, clinical conditions, and health-related quality of life: Examining the EQ-5D in the U.S. general population. Quality of Life Research, 14(10), 2187–2196.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Myint, P. K., Luben, R. N., Surtees, P. G., Wainwright, N. W., Bingham, S. A., Wareham, N. J., et al. (2009). Effect of age and sex on the relationship between different socioeconomic indices and self-reported functional health in the EPIC-Norfolk population-based study. Annals of Epidemiology, 19(5), 289–297.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Han, M. A., Ryu, S. Y., Park, J., Kang, M. G., Park, J. K., & Kim, K. S. (2008). Health-related quality of life assessment by the EuroQol-5D in some rural adults. Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, 41(3), 173–180.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kind, P., Dolan, P., Gudex, C., & Williams, A. (1998). Variations in population health status: Results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ, 316(7133), 736–741.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 420–428.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Wang, H., Kindig, D. A., & Mullahy, J. (2005). Variation in Chinese population health related quality of life: Results from a EuroQol study in Beijing, China. Quality of Life Research, 14(1), 119–132.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sen, A. (2002). Health: Perception versus observation. BMJ, 324(7342), 860–861.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fu, A. Z., & Kattan, M. W. (2006). Racial and ethnic differences in preference-based health status measure. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 22(12), 2439–2448.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wang, H. M., Patrick, D. L., Edwards, T. C., Skalicky, A. M., Zeng, H. Y., & Gu, W. W. (2012). Validation of the EQ-5D in a general population sample in urban China. Quality of Life Research, 21(1), 155–160.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Min-Woo Jo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kim, T.H., Jo, MW., Lee, Si. et al. Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in the general population of South Korea. Qual Life Res 22, 2245–2253 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0331-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0331-3

Keywords

Navigation